Objective: Sports nutrition and supplements form a rapidly growing field in sports science, focused on optimizing athletic performance and aiding post-exercise recovery. This study uses bibliometric methods to analyze scientific literature from 1993 to 2025, charting its evolution, thematic trends, and safety-regulation debates. Additionally, this study highlights the lack of physician input, focusing on safety and regulation debates. Materials and Methods: A total of 452 publications from the Web of Science Core Collection were analyzed, retrieved using 'athlete nutrition' or 'sports nutrition' and 'supplement' keywords, via R programming and the Bibliometrix-Biblioshiny package. No time limits were set. The analysis assessed publication types (e.g., research articles, reviews), growth rates, citations, keyword frequencies, and thematic maps. Non-English studies (Italian n=1, Russian n=1, Portuguese n=35) and corrections (n=3) were excluded. Results: The literature grew at 5.16 % annually, with 52.6% of publications being in the Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition . The U.S. led (40.9%), followed by Australia and the U.K. (7.7% each). Average citations reached 25.9. Key terms of 'sports performance' (n=52), 'ergogenic aid' (n=45), 'exercise' (n=39) dominated, with themes like performance ('caffeine, creatine') and recovery ('recovery') beingprominent. Supplement use varied (40-100%), with caffeine and creatine effective yet linked to high-dose risks and contamination concerns. Conclusion: Despite growth, safety and regulation gaps persist. Concentration in one journal and U.S. dominance reflect a dietitian-led field, but clinical effects, side effects (e.g., renal, cardiovascular), and doping risks demand physician input, which is currently underrepresented. Limited to one database, this study highlights the need for unbiased, multidisciplinary research and stricter regulations to ensure safety for athletes and beyond. This study is limited in scope due to its sole reliance on the Web of Science database.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zeynep Irmak Kaya (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: