• Home

Nutrition Analysis 2

5/11/22, 12:24 AM Nutrition Analysis of Scientific Literature #2 (Nutrition Groups 1-4)

https://sjsu.instructure.com/courses/1477261/assignments/6126200 1/5

Nutrition Analysis of Scientific Literature #2 (Nutrition
Groups 1-4)

Due Wednesday by 11:59pm Points 50 Submitting a file upload (Turnitin enabled)
Available until May 11 at 11:59pm

Start Assignment

Purpose of the Assignment
The purpose of this assignment is to learn how to critically read and analyze research articles.
When analyzing the article, be sure to consider feedback from your 1st Analysis as well as the
suggestions from class lectures and discussion.

Instructions
Each student is required to review one original research article (primary reference, peer-
reviewed), from the list of topics in the Assignment Packet
(https://sjsu.instructure.com/courses/1477261/files/66832848/download?download_frd=1) . You will
need to find your own peer-reviewed paper that relates to whichever topic your group selected from
the list of suggested topics. The article you select will be the same one that you present for your
group oral presentation.

Make sure to find an original research study, not a REVIEW or a META ANALYSIS (this is
critical for your grade, if you end up analyzing a review article, you won’t be able to get a passing
grade from this assignment).
See the rubric for the point breakdown for this assignment.
You can also use textbooks for additional background and support
Use your own words to discuss the article. DO NOT use direct quotes or copied material from
the article. Instead, paraphrase the source material using YOUR OWN WORDS and cite
appropriately in APA format (https://owl.excelsior.edu/citation-and-documentation/apa-style/) .
Do not include the questions you see below.

Assignment Details & Format
For more detailed instructions please refer to the Assignment Packet
(https://sjsu.instructure.com/courses/1477261/files/67046619/download?download_frd=1) .

5/11/22, 12:24 AM Nutrition Analysis of Scientific Literature #2 (Nutrition Groups 1-4)

https://sjsu.instructure.com/courses/1477261/assignments/6126200 2/5

Use your own words to discuss the answers using information from the article. DO NOT use direct
quotes or copied material from the article. Instead, paraphrase the source material using YOUR
OWN WORDS and cite appropriately in APA format. (https://owl.excelsior.edu/citation-and-
documentation/apa-style/) Do not include the questions. Your paper should be written in paragraph
form; it should NOT be a list of the questions and your responses.

In a 3 to 4-page essay, briefly describe and then critically analyze all of the following components
of the study:

1. What is the research problem? Another way to think about this is: Why was this study
conducted?

2. What is/are the hypothesis/hypotheses stated by the author(s)? If not stated directly, what does
the hypothesis appear to be?

3. A. Who were the study participants? How many were there and how were they recruited? B.
What were the inclusion/exclusion criteria for selecting the participants?

4. What was the study design?
5. What were the main study results?
6. Did the results support the authors’ hypothesis/hypotheses? Why or why not?
7. What was/were the limitation(s) and strength(s) discussed by the author(s)? These are usually in

the Discussion/Conclusion section of the article. Were there any additional strengths and
weaknesses not discussed by the author(s)? If so, discuss with a professional critique and do
not use overly personal opinion-based judgements. A. What conclusion(s) did the author(s)
make? B. How can the research findings be applied? If no applications were suggested by the
authors, provide ideas for how the findings could be applied. C. Based on this study and past
research discussed in the Introduction, what directions should researchers take for future study
of this topic?

Form and Style Guidelines
Your paper should:

be written in narrative, paragraph format, no numbering or bullets;
be written in formal style-3 person only (do not use 1 or 2 person, such as “we”, “I” or “you”);
be a professional critique and NOT contain overly personal opinion-based judgements;
cite a professional reference for any nutrition or fitness guidelines or recommendations
suggested in text (see resource page in Syllabus);
NOT use direct quotes or copied material from a source. Instead, paraphrase the source
material using YOUR OWN WORDS and cite appropriately in APA format;
use past tense when describing the research;
be typed, double spaced, and 3-4 pages in length;
be in a font size that is Times New Roman 12 point or similar size (easy to read);
be left justified (do not right justify/align, which centers text) and have 1-inch margins;
be turned in on Canvas.

rd st nd

5/11/22, 12:24 AM Nutrition Analysis of Scientific Literature #2 (Nutrition Groups 1-4)

https://sjsu.instructure.com/courses/1477261/assignments/6126200 3/5

Analysis of Scientific Literature #1 and #2 (1)

5/11/22, 12:24 AM Nutrition Analysis of Scientific Literature #2 (Nutrition Groups 1-4)

https://sjsu.instructure.com/courses/1477261/assignments/6126200 4/5

Criteria Ratings Pts

5 pts

10 pts

4 pts

5 pts

3 pts

6 pts

6 pts

Followed directions, formatted correctly,
Turnitin report confirms originality

5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent
format, followed
directions and
original writing

4 to >2.0 pts
Some directions
not followed or
errors in fomatting
or originality

2 to >0 pts
Major flaws in
formatting,
following
directions and
originality

Writing, Syntax, Spelling, Grammar 10 to >9.0 pts
Excellent
writing, showed
clear
understanding

9 to >5.0 pts
Major flaws in
writing, syntax,
spelling and
grammar

5 to >0 pts
Some errors in
writing, syntax,
spelling and
grammar.

Question 1 – State the research problem
clearly

4 to >3.0 pts
Excellent,
showed clear
understanding

3 to >2.0 pts
Good, showed
basic level of
understanding

2 to >0 pts
Poor, showed lack of
understanding, or
not included

Question 2 – Describe the author’s
hypothesis and research goals clearly

5 to >4.0 pts
Excellent,
showed clear
understanding

4 to >2.0 pts
Good, showed
basic level of
understanding

2 to >0 pts
Poor, showed lack
of understanding or
not included

Question 3 – Describe the participant
inclusion and exclusion criteria

3 to >2.0 pts
Excellent,
showed clear
understanding

2 to >1.0 pts
Good, showed
basic level of
understanding

1 to >0 pts
Poor, showed lack
of understanding or
not included

Question 4 – Describe the study design 6 to >5.0 pts
Excellent,
showed clear
understanding

5 to >3.0 pts
Good, showed
basic level of
understanding

3 to >0 pts
Poor, showed lack of
understanding, or
not included

Question 5 – Describe the study results
clearly in one’s own words

6 to >5.0 pts
Excellent,
showed clear
understanding

5 to >3.0 pts
Good, showed
basic level of
understanding

3 to >0 pts
Poor, showed lack
of understanding or
not included

5/11/22, 12:24 AM Nutrition Analysis of Scientific Literature #2 (Nutrition Groups 1-4)

https://sjsu.instructure.com/courses/1477261/assignments/6126200 5/5

Total Points: 50

Criteria Ratings Pts

2 pts

3 pts

6 pts

Question 6 – Did the results support the
researcher’s hypothesis?

2 pts
Excellent,
showed clear
understanding

1 pts
Good, showed
basic level of
understanding

0 pts
Poor, showed lack
of understanding or
not included

Question 7 – Describe the limitations and
strengths of the research study

3 to >2.0 pts
Excellent,
showed clear
understanding

2 to >1.0 pts
Good, showed
basic level of
understanding

1 to >0 pts
Poor, showed lack
of understanding or
not included

Question 8 – What were the conclusions
of the study and how can they be appled
to real life? What ideas for future
research did this study spark?

6 to >5.0 pts
Excellent,
showed clear
understanding

5 to >3.0 pts
Good, showed
basic level of
understanding

3 to >0 pts
Poor, showed lack
of understanding or
not included

Nutrition Analysis 2

Experimental Gerontology 83 (2016) 112–119

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Experimental Gerontology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/expgero

Effect of creatine supplementation and drop-set resistance training in
untrained aging adults

Sarah Johannsmeyer a, Darren G. Candow a,⁎, C. Markus Brahms a, Deborah Michel b, Gordon A. Zello b
a Faculty of Kinesiology and Health Studies, University of Regina, Canada
b College of Pharmacy and Nutrition, University of Saskatchewan, Canada

⁎ Corresponding author at: Faculty of Kinesiology & Hea
3737 Wascana Parkway, Regina, SK S4S 0A2, Canada.

E-mail address: Darren.Candow@uregina.ca (D.G. Can

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.exger.2016.08.005
0531-5565/© 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

a b s t r a c t

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:
Received 15 June 2016
Received in revised form 4 August 2016
Accepted 10 August 2016
Available online 11 August 2016

Section Editor: Christiaan Leeuwenburgh

Objective: To investigate the effects of creatine supplementation and drop-set resistance training in untrained
aging adults. Participants were randomized to one of two groups: Creatine (CR: n = 14, 7 females, 7 males;
58.0 ± 3.0 yrs, 0.1 g/kg/day of creatine + 0.1 g/kg/day of maltodextrin) or Placebo (PLA: n = 17, 7 females, 10
males; age: 57.6 ± 5.0 yrs, 0.2 g/kg/day of maltodextrin) during 12 weeks of drop-set resistance training
(3 days/week; 2 sets of leg press, chest press, hack squat and lat pull-down exercises performed to muscle fatigue
at 80% baseline 1-repetition maximum [1-RM] immediately followed by repetitions to muscle fatigue at 30%
baseline 1-RM).
Methods: Prior to and following training and supplementation, assessments were made for body composition,
muscle strength, muscle endurance, tasks of functionality, muscle protein catabolism and diet.
Results: Drop-set resistance training improved muscle mass, muscle strength, muscle endurance and tasks of
functionality (p b 0.05). The addition of creatine to drop-set resistance training significantly increased body
mass (p = 0.002) and muscle mass (p = 0.007) compared to placebo. Males on creatine increased muscle
strength (lat pull-down only) to a greater extent than females on creatine (p = 0.005). Creatine enabled males
to resistance train at a greater capacity over time compared to males on placebo (p = 0.049) and females on cre-
atine (p = 0.012). Males on creatine (p = 0.019) and females on placebo (p = 0.014) decreased 3-MH compared
to females on creatine.
Conclusions: The addition of creatine to drop-set resistance training augments the gains in muscle mass from re-
sistance training alone. Creatine is more effective in untrained aging males compared to untrained aging females.

© 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Sarcopenia
Muscle mass
Strength
Endurance
Muscle protein catabolism

1. Introduction

The age-related loss of muscle mass and muscle performance has a
negative effect on physical function (Balagopal et al., 1997), which sub-
sequently decreases the ability to perform activities of daily living
(Manini and Clark, 2013). Two interventions which may benefit aging
individuals are creatine supplementation and resistance training (for
reviews see Candow et al., 2014; Devries and Phillips, 2014; Gualano
et al., 2016). Creatine has been shown to increase intramuscular total
creatine (i.e. free creatine and PCr) in aging adults (Brose et al., 2003).
The increase in high energy phosphates could allow one to train with
a greater volume of resistance training leading to an increase in muscle
mass (Chrusch et al., 2001). Furthermore, creatine may have a direct ef-
fect on muscle biology by influencing cellular hydration status (Balsom
et al., 1995), satellite cell activity (Olsen et al., 2006), anabolic hormone
production (i.e. IGF-1) (Burke et al., 2008; Deldicque et al., 2005), myo-
genic regulatory transcription factors (Hespel et al., 2001; Willoughby

lth Studies, University of Regina,

dow).

and Rosene, 2003) and muscle protein kinetics (Candow et al., 2008;
Parise et al., 2001; Safdar et al., 2008).

Speculation exists that the age-related loss of muscle mass is partial-
ly caused by an attenuated response to resistance training (Breen and
Phillips, 2011). Therefore, a greater volume of resistance training may
be needed to produce significant muscle accretion and strength gains
in aging individuals. One potential strategy which may help increase
the volume of resistance training performed and subsequently benefit
aging muscle is combining heavy loads with light loads in each working
set. Young adults who performed 3 sets of light load resistance training
(30% 1-RM to muscle fatigue) experienced similar gains in muscle mass
compared to 3 sets of heavy load resistance training (80% 1-RM to mus-
cle fatigue) after 10 weeks (Mitchell et al., 2012). However, the 80% 1-
RM group had superior muscle strength compared to the 30% 1-RM
group. In postmenopausal women, 3 sets of light load training (30% 1-
RM to muscle fatigue) for 10 weeks produced significant gains in muscle
mass and strength (Weisgarber et al., 2015). Results across studies indi-
cate that heavy load (80% baseline 1-RM) and light load (30% baseline 1-
RM) resistance training increases muscle size and strength. Since aging
is characterized by a loss of muscle mass and muscle performance, it is
plausible that a resistance training program which combines heavy

113S. Johannsmeyer et al. / Experimental Gerontology 83 (2016) 112–119

and light loads (80% baseline 1-RM + 30% baseline 1-RM) in the same
training set (i.e. drop-set) may benefit aging adults.

Based on the potential of creatine for increasing aging muscle mass,
strength (for reviews see Candow et al., 2014; Gualano et al., 2016;
Devries and Phillips, 2014) and muscle performance (i.e. number of rep-
etitions at a specific percentage of maximal strength) (Rawson and
Volek, 2003), the purpose of this study was to compare the effects of
creatine supplementation and drop-set resistance training to placebo
and drop-set resistance training in untrained healthy aging adults. It
was hypothesized that creatine supplementation during drop-set resis-
tance training would increase muscle mass, upper and lower body mus-
cle strength and endurance, functionality and decrease muscle protein
catabolism compared to placebo during drop-set resistance training.

2. Methods

2.1. Experimental design and participants

The study was a double-blind, repeated measures design. In order to
minimize differences between groups at baseline, participants were
matched according to gender, age, weight, height and baseline physical
activity status. After exclusion criteria were applied, participants were
randomized using a computer generated schedule on a 1:1 basis to sup-
plement with creatine monohydrate (CR) or placebo (PLA) during
12 weeks of drop-set resistance training. A research assistant, who
was not involved in any other aspect of the study, was responsible for
randomization. The primary dependent variables assessed at baseline
and after the intervention included: (1) body composition (muscle
mass, fat mass), (2) muscle strength (1-RM for the leg press, chest
press, hack squat, and lat pull-down exercise), (3) muscle endurance
(leg press and chest press exercises; maximal number of repetitions
performed at 80% and 70% baseline 1-RM respectively), (4) tasks of
functionality (walking speed, balance, hand grip strength) and (5) uri-
nary excretion of 3-methylhistidine (indicator of muscle protein catab-
olism). In addition, participants filled out a 3-day food diary during the
first and final week of training to determine whether total energy (kcal)
and macronutrient intake changed over time.

Forty participants (21 males, 19 females) volunteered to participate
in the study. Both males and females were included to increase the im-
pact of the study findings to the general population. Females were post-
menopausal for at least 1 year (defined as having their last menstrual
cycle ≥ 1 year prior to the start of the study). Participants were required
to fill out a leisure time exercise questionnaire at the start of the study,
which indicated the average number of times they performed strenuous
(i.e. heart beats rapidly), moderate (i.e. not exhausting) and mild exer-
cise (i.e. minimal effort) per week (Godin and Shephard, 1985). Partic-
ipants also filled out a Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire (PAR-
Q+), which assessed their ability to participate in the resistance train-
ing program. If a participant indicated a contraindication to exercise,
they were required to get medical clearance before starting the study.

Participants were excluded if they had taken medications that affect
muscle biology (i.e. corticosteroids) or creatine
monohydrate ≤ 12 weeks prior to the start of the study; if they had a his-
tory of fragility fractures; diseases that affect muscle biology (i.e.
Crohn’s Disease), if they suffered from severe osteoarthritis; if they
had participated in moderate-vigorous resistance training (≥3 times
per week) for 6 weeks prior to the start of the study; if they were vege-
tarian; if they were planning to travel during the study period for
N2 weeks at a time or if they had pre-existing kidney or liver
abnormalities.

Participants were instructed not to change their dietary habits, en-
gage in any additional physical activity that was not part of their normal
daily routine or consume non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs during
the study as these interventions can affect muscle protein synthesis
(Trappe et al., 2002). The Research Ethics Board at the University of

Regina approved the study and participants were informed of the risks
and purposes of the study before their written consent was obtained.

2.2. Creatine supplementation and blinding procedures

Creatine (Creapure® AlzChem Trostberg GmbH, Germany) and pla-
cebo (Globe Plus 10 DE Maltodextrin, Univar Canada) were adminis-
tered in powder form. The creatine supplementation dosage was
0.1 g/kg/day which has previously been shown to be effective for in-
creasing muscle mass in aging adults without resulting in adverse
events (Candow et al., 2015, 2008). Creatine was mixed with equal
parts maltodextrin (0.1 g/kg/day creatine + 0.1 g/kg/day maltodextrin)
and the placebo group received 0.2 g/kg/day maltodextrin so the pow-
ders were identical in taste, texture, color and appearance. Contents of
the creatine monohydrate powder were verified by testing in an inde-
pendent laboratory (The Cary Company, Addison IL, USA; creatine
purity N 99.9%). On training days, participants consumed half their sup-
plement immediately before and half immediately after each exercise
session. Creatine supplementation immediately before and immediate-
ly after resistance training sessions has a positive effect on muscle mass
(Candow et al., 2014), strength (Candow et al., 2015) and muscle pro-
tein catabolism in aging adults (Candow et al., 2014). On non-training
days, participants were instructed to ingest one third of their daily sup-
plement with each meal (i.e. breakfast, lunch, dinner) as creatine reten-
tion has been shown to be higher if co-ingested with insulin-simulating
nutrients (i.e., glucose or protein) (Jäger et al., 2011). An individual not
involved in any other aspect of the study was responsible for mixing and
packaging up the supplements in plastic bags and preparing individual
study kits. Each study kit contained the participants’ supplement for
the duration of the study, detailed supplementation instructions, and
measuring spoons. Participants were instructed to mix their supple-
ment in water but not caffeinated beverages as this has been shown to
decrease the ergogenic effects of creatine (Vandenberghe et al., 1996).
A retrospective treatment identification questionnaire was adminis-
tered to all participants upon completion of the study in order to assess
whether participants thought they were administered creatine, placebo,
or unsure about what supplement they consumed.

2.3. Drop-set resistance training program

Prior to the start of supplementation, participants became familiar
with the resistance training equipment. The resistance training equip-
ment consisted of four machine-based exercises, which included two
upper body exercises (chest press, lat pull-down) and two lower body
exercises (hack squat, leg press) using Atlantis® (Precision Series) and
Equalizer machines in the Fitness and Lifestyle Centre at the University
of Regina.

Familiarization 1-RM strength testing was performed for each exer-
cise. Following a 5-minute warm-up on a stationary cycle ergometer at a
self-selected intensity, participants performed two warm-up sets of
each exercise to be tested in the following order: 1 set of 10 repetitions
using a load, which was determined by each participant to be comfort-
able and 1 set of 5 repetitions using a heavier weight. Two-minutes after
the warm-up sets, the load was progressively increased for each subse-
quent 1-RM attempt. Participants rested (passively) at least 2 min be-
tween 1-RM attempts. All participants reached their 1-RM in 6 sets or
less. 5 min of passive rest separated each 1-RM assessment between dif-
ferent muscle groups.

The first training session of the familiarization phase (5 sessions)
was directly supervised by a researcher, blinded to group allocation.
Subsequent familiarization and study training sessions were indirected
supervised by staff in the Fitness and Lifestyle Centre, University of Re-
gina. During the familiarization phase, participants were properly
shown how to use the equipment and perform repetitions to muscle fa-
tigue using 80% and 30% of their familiarization 1-RM. During the first
two familiarization sessions, participants performed 1 set of drop-set

114 S. Johannsmeyer et al. / Experimental Gerontology 83 (2016) 112–119

resistance training for each exercise in the following order: leg press,
chest press, hack squat and lat pull-down. In the subsequent familiariza-
tion sessions, participants performed 2 sets of drop-set resistance train-
ing for each exercise. An important aspect of the resistance training
program was that all sets were performed to muscle fatigue (defined
as the inability to perform the concentric phase of a muscle contraction;
Candow et al., 2011). Baseline 1-RM strength testing was performed no
earlier than 48 h after the last familiarization session. The same re-
searcher, blinded to group allocation, performed all assessments. During
the study, participants exercised 3 days/week, on non-consecutive days,
to reduce the risk of injury. Participants performed 2 sets of drop-set re-
sistance training for the leg press, chest press, hack squat and lat pull-
down exercises. Each set consisted of performing repetitions to muscle
fatigue at 80% baseline 1-RM immediately followed by repetitions to
muscle fatigue at 30% baseline 1-RM (Fig. 1). The training load did not
change during the 12 weeks of training and supplementation, as the
purpose of the study was to overload the upper and lower body muscu-
lature by increasing the number of repetitions performed to muscle fa-
tigue. Participants filled out training logs so that resistance training
volume (weight × sets × repetitions) and progression could be deter-
mined. Only complete muscle contractions were used in the training
volume calculations. Participants were contacted every second week
by email to help ensure exercise and supplementation adherence. Addi-
tionally, personal meetings were arranged and supervised training ses-
sions were offered throughout the program if required.

2.4. Body composition

Whole-body muscle mass and fat mass were assessed by dual-ener-
gy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) using a Hologic® Discovery™ system.
Participants were instructed to refrain from intense physical activity
for 24 h and food and drink for 3 h prior to their DXA scan. Before scan-
ning, participants were required to remove all objects containing metal
(i.e. jewelry, glasses, clothing with buttons, and/or zippers). Nuclear
Medicine Technologists performed the scans at baseline and at the
end of the study. The coefficients of variation were 0.15% for muscle
mass and 0.33% for fat mass.

2.5. Strength and endurance

Leg press, chest press, hack squat and lat pull-down strength and leg
press and chest press endurance was assessed using a standard testing
protocol. Seat position and settings were recorded for each participant
to ensure consistency between pre- and post-testing. Muscle strength
and endurance was assessed in the following order: (1) leg press
strength, (2) chest press strength, (3) hack squat strength, (4) lat pull-
down strength, (5) leg press endurance, (6) chest press endurance.
5 min of passive rest separated each assessment and the time of day
and order of tests was identical at the beginning and end of the study.

A horizontal, bilateral leg press machine with backrest placed in a
seated position was used to measure 1-RM leg press strength and en-
durance. Following a demonstration, participants were positioned in
the leg press machine so that a 90° angle at the knees was achieved
and feet placed shoulder width part. The starting position was near

Fig. 1. Description of th

full leg extension, with knees slightly bent. Participants were instructed
to perform the contraction to a knee flexion of 90°, without putting the
load down at the end of the movement, followed by a full extension
back to starting position. The coefficient of variation was 0.30%.

The 1-RM test for the hack squat was similar to that of the leg press.
The same bilateral, horizontal leg press machine was used but the back-
rest was adjusted to a supine position. Following a demonstration, par-
ticipants were positioned in the hack squat to a 90° knee and hip angle.
Feet were placed shoulder width apart. The starting position was near
full leg extension. Participants were instructed to slowly flex their
knees to a 90° angle and then push the load back to full leg extension
without locking the knees. The coefficient of variation was 0.41%.

For chest press 1-RM and endurance, participants were positioned in
a vertical bilateral chest press machine with both feet placed on the
floor. Following a demonstration, participants were instructed not to
lift their hips off the bench or arch their back during the lift. Participants
were positioned in the chest press machine so that the adjacent bars
lined up mid-chest level. Participants were instructed to grasp the
bars (overhand grip) approximately shoulder width apart and push
the load away from the body until full extension without locking the el-
bows and then lower the load back to the starting position. The coeffi-
cient of variation was 0.46%.

The 1-RM strength test for the lat pull-down was conducted on a lat
pull-down cable pulley machine. Following a demonstration, partici-
pants were instructed to grasp the bar (overhand grip) slightly wider
than shoulder width apart, sit down and then tuck their legs under
the thigh-pads for support. Participants pulled the bar down to their
chin and then slowly returned the load to the starting position without
locking the elbows. Shoulders remained stable and torso slightly arched
during the exercise. The coefficient of variation was 0.45%.

2.6. Functionality

Handgrip strength was assessed using a handgrip dynamometer
(Jamar® Hydraulic Hand Dynamometer by Sammons Preston Rolyan).
The test was conducted in an upright standing position and the arm to
be tested was flexed at a 90° angle with the elbow by the side of the
body. Grip width was adjusted to the participants’ hand size. Partici-
pants were instructed to squeeze the dynamometer with maximal iso-
metric effort for 3 s. Participants performed one practice trial, followed
by two test trials for each hand with 1 min rest between trials. The
highest value produced from each hand was recorded. The coefficient
of variation was 0.34%.

Dynamic balance was assessed by recording the time it took partic-
ipants to perform backward tandem walking (i.e. toe to heel) over a dis-
tance of 6 m on a 10 cm-wide board that was raised about 4 cm off the
ground. The coefficient of variation was 0.36%. Additionally, the number
of errors (i.e. number of times the participant stepped off the walking
board) during the test was recorded. Participants performed one prac-
tice trial, followed by two test trials, for which the average time and er-
rors were recorded. Walking speed was assessed by the time required to
walk an 80 m course on an indoor track as fast as possible. The coeffi-
cient of variation was 1.26%.

e training protocol.

115S. Johannsmeyer et al. / Experimental Gerontology 83 (2016) 112–119

2.7. Muscle protein catabolism

For the measurement of 3-methylhistidine (3-MH), an indicator of
muscle protein catabolism, urine was collected during the last 24 h of
a 72 h meat free diet (not protein free) immediately before and imme-
diately after the study. A meat-free diet was implemented because meat
consumption increases urinary 3-MH values and may falsely represent
an increase in myofibrillar protein turnover (Lukaski et al., 1981). The
urine collection procedure was to discard the first urination upon wak-
ing in the morning and then collect all urinations for 24 h, including the
first urination upon waking the following morning. Participants were
instructed to store their specimen in a cold place or fridge during the
24 h urine collection. After completing the 24 h urine collection, partic-
ipants recorded the total urine volume (ml) and poured off two aliquots
into vials, which were then sealed in a plastic bag. The vials were stored
in a freezer at −20°C until analyzed. The concentration of 3-MH was
measured using gas chromatography mass spectrometry (GC–MS)
(Agilent) (Rathmacher et al., 1992). The daily amount of 3-MH excreted
by each participant was determined by multiplying the concentration
by the 24 h urine volume. This amount of 3-MH was then expressed rel-
ative to lean tissue mass (nmol/kg LTM). The coefficient of variation was
0.50%.

2.8. Diet

Dietary intake was recorded during the first and final week of sup-
plementation and resistance training to assess differences in total ener-
gy and macronutrient composition between groups. Participants used a
3 day food booklet to record food intake for two weekdays and one
weekend day. Participants were instructed to record all food items, in-
cluding portion sizes consumed for the three designated days.

2.9. Adverse events

In the case of an adverse event, participants were asked to complete
an adverse event form in order to provide details on the type of adverse
event, the severity (i.e. mild, moderate, severe, or life threatening), the
frequency, and the relationship to the intervention (i.e. not related, un-
likely, possible, probable, or definite).

2.10. Sample size estimation and statistical analyses

A priori power analysis (G*Power v. 3.1.5.1) showed that 34 partici-
pants were required. This calculation was based on a moderate effect
size (Cohen’s d = 0.25), an alpha level of 0.05, a β-value of 0.8 for a re-
peated measures: within-between interactions, ANOVA approach (Faul
et al., 2007).

A 2 (group: CR vs. PLA) × 2 (gender: males vs. females) × 2 (time:
pre- vs. post-training) repeated measures analysis of variance
(ANOVA) was conducted to determine differences between groups
and gender over time for the dependent variables of body composition,
muscle strength, muscle endurance, balance, hand grip strength, walk-
ing speed, 3-MH, diet and training volume progression. If significant
main effects or interactions were found, simple main effects analysis
followed using Tukey’s post hoc tests or t-tests, file splitting and profile
plots. A t-test was used to assess baseline characteristics and average
total training volume between groups.

Significance was set at an alpha level of 0.05 and all results are
expressed as means ± standard deviation. The magnitude of the differ-
ence between significant means was determined by eta squared (η2).
This is a measure of the effect size and therefore of the proportion of
the total variance that can be explained by the effects of the treatment.
A η2 value of 0.15 represents large differences, 0.06 represents medium
differences, and 0.01 represents small differences. Statistical analyses
were performed using IBM® SPSS® Statistics, v. 21.

3. Results

3.1. Participants and adverse events

Of the forty participants who volunteered for the study, 3 partici-
pants (2 male, 1 female) did not meet the inclusion criteria and 1 partic-
ipant (male) withdrew because of time constraints. Thirty-six
participants started the familiarization phase with 3 participants (fe-
males) withdrawing because of knee pain, shoulder problems and
time constrains. Therefore, thirty-three participants started the
supplementation and resistance training portion of the study. Two
participants (1 male, 1 female) then withdrew because of health
issues that were unrelated to the study (see Fig. 2 for a summary
of recruitment, allocation and analysis). Thirty-one participants
completed the study. There were no significant differences between
the CR and PLA groups at baseline for age, body weight, height, or
physical activity status (Table 1).

Following the 12 weeks of supplementation and training, 5 par-
ticipants in the creatine group correctly guessed they were receiving
creatine, 6 participants incorrectly guessed and 3 participants did
not know. In the PLA group, 6 participants correctly guessed they
were receiving placebo, 4 participants incorrectly guessed and 6 par-
ticipants did not know. Supplementation compliance, based on
participant’s entries in their logs, was similar between the CR and
PLA group (98% for both groups). Twenty-six participants (CR =
12, PLA = 14) were able to provide urine samples at the beginning
and end of the study for determination of 3-MH. Twenty-nine partic-
ipants (CR = 14, PLA = 15) were able to provide 3 day food records
at the beginning and end of the study.

There were no serious adverse events reported over time. How-
ever, as expected, most participants experienced muscle soreness
in the first few weeks of training. One participant in the PLA group
reported back strain during the familiarization phase and did not
perform the hack squat during the 12 week study. Another partici-
pant was diagnosed with a torn shoulder muscle at the beginning
of the study, which was likely related to a past shoulder injury.
Two subjects in the PLA group reported gastrointestinal distress at
the beginning of the supplementation. One participant in the CR
group reported increased sweating/hot flashes while working out
as well as during the day.

3.2. Body composition

There was a significant gender main effect (p = 0.003, η2 = 0.28)
and a group × time interaction for body weight (p = 0.002; η2 =
0.31). The CR group experienced a significant increase in body weight
over time (pre: 78.3 ± 17.3 kg, post: 80.0 ± 18.3 kg) with no change
for the PLA group (pre: 81.8 ± 18.9, post: 81.2 ± 18.4 kg).

There was a significant time main effect (p b 0.001, η2 = 0.54), gen-
der main effect (p b 0.001, η2 = 0.66) and a group × time interaction for
muscle mass (p = 0.007, η2 = 0.24). The CR group increased muscle
mass more than the PLA group (Fig. 3). Both groups experienced a de-
crease in fat mass over time (p = 0.002, η2 = 0.30) (CR: pre: 27.2 ±
9.5 kg, post: 25.9 ± 9.3 kg; PLA: pre: 27.8 ± 9.0 kg, post: 26.3 ±
8.8 kg), with no differences between groups or gender.

3.3. Muscle strength and endurance

There was a time main effect (p b 0.001, η2 = 0.78) and gender main
effect (p b 0.001, η2 = 0.61) for leg press strength and hack squat
strength (time main effect: p b 0.001, η2 = 0.70; gender main effect:
p = 0.001, η2 = 0.38), with no differences between groups over time.
Similar to leg press and hack squat strength, there was a time main ef-
fect (p b 0.001, η2 = 0.76) and gender main effect (p b 0.001, η2 =
0.65) for chest press strength. There was also a gender × time interac-
tion (p = 0.005, η2 = 0.27). Both males and females increased chest

Fig. 2. Summary of recruitment, allocation and analyses.

116 S. Johannsmeyer et al. / Experimental Gerontology 83 (2016) 112–119

press strength over time (p b 0.001) but the change was greater in males
(pre: 82.3 ± 21.6 kg, post: 100.3 ± 26.9 kg) compared to females (pre:
37.7 ± 10.2 kg, post: 46.7 ± 11.0 kg).

Regarding lat pull-down strength, there was a time main effect
(p b 0.001, η2 = 0.82), gender main effect (p b 0.001, η2 = 0.82),
gender × time interaction (p = 0.005, η2 = 0.28) and a

Table 1
Subject characteristics at baseline for the CR group and PLA group.

Group Age Mass Height Training status

(years) (kg) (cm) Mild/moderate/strenuous
exercise (times/week)

CR
(n = 14)

58.0 ± 3.0 78.3 ± 17.3 168.2 ± 9.1 3.6 ± 3.1/1.9 ± 2.2/2.3 ± 1.3

PLA
(n = 17)

57.6 ± 5.0 81.8 ± 18.9 171.7 ± 12.6 4.0 ± 5.7/3.1 ± 2.8/2.1 ± 2.1

Values are means ± standard deviation.

group × gender × time interaction (p = 0.049, η2 = 0.15). Both males
and females increased lat pull-down strength over time (p b 0.001)
but the change was greater in males (pre: 80.4 ± 12.5 kg, post:
93.0 ± 15.1 kg) compared to females (pre: 38.8 ± 7.7 kg, post:
45.7 ± 8.7 kg). Splitting the file by group showed that males on creatine
increased lat pull-down strength more (pre: 81.8 ± 12.8 kg, post:
98.0 ± 17.2 kg, p = 0.005) than females on creatine (pre: 39.3 ±
5.9 kg, post: 45.8 ± 7.2 kg) with no differences between males and fe-
males on placebo (Males: pre: 79.2 ± 12.9 kg, post: 88.6 ± 12.5 kg; Fe-
males: pre: 38.2 ± 9.7 kg, post: 45.6 ± 10.6 kg). Splitting the file by
gender showed that there were no significant differences between
males or females on creatine or placebo. There was a trend (p =
0.053) for males in the CR group to have greater lat pull-down strength
(pre: 81.8 ± 12.8 kg, post: 98.0 ± 17.2 kg) compared to males on place-
bo (pre: 79.2 ± 12.9 kg, post: 88.6 ± 12.5 kg).

There was a time main effect for leg press (p b 0.001, η2 = 0.77), and
chest press endurance (p b 0.001, η2 = 0.72), with no differences be-
tween groups or gender (see Table 2).

Fig. 3. Lean tissue mass before and after 12 weeks of resistance training and
supplementation for the CR and PLA groups. Values are mean ± standard deviation.
*Significantly different after training (p b 0.05). **Indicates that the CR group increased
lean tissue mass more than the PLA group (p = 0.007).

117S. Johannsmeyer et al. / Experimental Gerontology 83 (2016) 112–119

3.4. Tests of functionality

There was a time main effect for the number of errors (p = 0.042,
η2 = 0.15) and time taken to finish the balance board test (p b 0.001,
η2 = 0.70). In addition, there was a group × time interaction for the
time taken to finish the balance board test (

Nutrition Analysis 2

NUFS/KIN 163 – Physical Fitness and Nutrition, Spring 2022, San Jose State University

Revised 012422

1

ANALYSIS OF SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE #1 & #2

Directions

You will write two (2) Analyses of Scientific Literature papers. Each will be a 3 to 4 page critique of an

empirical research study that has been published in a peer-reviewed academic journal. The specific paper to be

critiqued for the 1st Analysis will be given to you by your instructor. For the second Analysis of Scientific

Literature you will need to find your own peer-reviewed paper that relates to whichever topic your group

selected from the list of suggested topics further down in this packet. The research study you select needs to be

recent, published within the last 10 years. The article you select will be the same one that you present for your

group oral presentation. The article must be referenced in your written assignment. Your instructor will provide

you with specific information on how to select a topic, how to find a worthwhile study to analyze, and how to

turn in your Analyses of Scientific Literature. Contact your instructor if you would like confirmation on the

paper you selected.

After the first Analysis of Scientific Literature, you will receive feedback on your critical evaluation skills.

Please use this feedback when preparing the second Analysis of Scientific Literature.

Please see the syllabus for the due dates for the two different analyses. Late papers will be docked 2.5 points

for each day or partial day late, so please be sure to turn your paper in on time.

Each student must do his/her own work. Plagiarism will not be tolerated and will result in a failing grade on the

assignment and the student being reported to the Office of Student Conduct and Ethical Development. Turnitin

will be enabled within Canvas and reports will reviewed by instructors prior to grading.

Form and Style Guidelines

Your paper should:

• be written in narrative, paragraph format, no numbering or bullets;

• be written in formal style-3rd person only (do not use 1st or 2nd person, such as “we”, “I” or “you”);

• be a professional critique and NOT contain overly personal opinion-based judgements;

• cite a professional reference for any nutrition or fitness guidelines or recommendations suggested in text
(see resource page in Syllabus);

• NOT use direct quotes or copied material from a source. Instead, paraphrase the source material using
YOUR OWN WORDS and cite appropriately in APA format;

• use past tense when describing the research;

• be typed, double spaced, and 3-4 pages in length;

• be in a font size that is Times New Roman 12 point or similar size (easy to read);

• be left justified (do not right justify/align, which centers text) and have 1-inch margins;

• be turned in on Canvas.

Guidelines for Analyzing Research:

Be sure to consider the suggestions from lecture and the handout “How to Understand and Interpret Food and

Health-Related Scientific Studies” when analyzing the articles. Use the questions below as a guide to critically

evaluate each section of the paper. Each one of these questions should be addressed within the paper.

NUFS/KIN 163 – Physical Fitness and Nutrition, Spring 2022, San Jose State University

Revised 012422

2

Analyses of Scientific Literature #1 & #2

Purpose: To understand how to critically read and analyze research articles.

For #1, your instructor will provide you with an article on Canvas. You can access the link to the article in the

assignment description. For #2, you will select your own study. Make sure to select either an experimental or

observational study so that all components of the assignment can be addressed, a review paper or meta-

analysis is not acceptable. The study you select needs to be recent, published within the last 10 years.

Directions

In a 3 to 4-page essay, briefly describe and then critically analyze all of the following components of the

study:

1. What is the research problem? Another way to think about this is: Why was this study conducted?

2. What is/are the hypothesis/hypotheses stated by the author(s)? If not stated directly, what does the
hypothesis appear to be?

3. A. Who were the study participants? How many were there and how were they recruited?

B. What were the inclusion/exclusion criteria for selecting the participants?

4. What was the study design?

5. What were the main study results? (Briefly reference numerical data when appropriate.)

6. Did the results support the authors’ hypothesis/hypotheses? Why or why not?

7. What was/were the limitation(s) and strength(s) discussed by the author(s)? These are usually in the
Discussion/Conclusion section of the article. Were there any additional strengths and weaknesses not

discussed by the author(s)? If so, discuss with a professional critique and do not use overly personal

opinion-based judgements.

A. What conclusion(s) did the author(s) make?

B. How can the research findings be applied? If no applications were suggested by the authors, provide

ideas for how the findings could be applied.

C. Based on this study and past research discussed in the Introduction, what directions should

researchers take for future study of this topic?

Use your own words to discuss the answers using information from the article. DO NOT use direct quotes or

copied material from the article. Instead, paraphrase the source material using YOUR OWN WORDS and

cite appropriately in APA format. Do not include the questions. Your paper should be written in paragraph

form; it should NOT be a list of the questions and your responses.

Your paper will be submitted to CANVAS with turnitin.com enabled by the instructor to check for plagiarism.

NUFS/KIN 163 – Physical Fitness and Nutrition, Spring 2022, San Jose State University

Revised 012422

3

SUGGESTED TOPICS FOR NUTRITION PRESENTATIONS
Please choose from this list or choose your own topic (if approved by instructor)

LIPIDS/FAT

Possible sub-topics

• Dietary fat recommendations/needs for children (< 2 yr olds), elderly

• Dietary fat and risk for various cancers

• Omega-3 fatty acid (linolenic acid) and treatment or prevention of diseases

• Fat replacements used in the food industry

PROTEIN and AMINO ACID SUPPLEMENTS

Possible sub-topics

• Whey protein supplements for weight (muscle) gains

• Glutamine and the immune system and/or muscle recovery in athletes

• Creatine supplementation: effects on strength performance OR effects on endurance performance

• Nitrogen balance studies in determining protein needs for athletes

• Branched-chain amino acids and exercise performance

DRUGS, SUPPLEMENTS, HERBS & DIETS FOR WEIGHT CONTROL

Possible sub-topics:

• Evaluate hydroxycitrate supplement for weight loss

• Evaluate ketogenic diets for weight loss

• Evaluate intermittent fasting for weight loss

• Evaluate/review the “Phen-Fen” drugs

• Evaluate/review over-the-counter drug phenylpropanolamine, Alli, etc.

• Evaluate ephedrine (ephedra), EGCG, ginseng or Hoodia and weight loss

DISORDERED EATING ISSUES and OBESITY

Possible sub-topics

• Eating disorders: case studies, adverse complications, therapies, etc.

• Childhood obesity: prevalence, causes, and treatment

• Research in the area of obesity and genetics

• Adult obesity

VITAMINS & MINERALS IN HEALTH

Possible sub-topics

• Vitamin E’s role in reducing risk of heart disease or cancer

• Zinc and the common cold

• Folic acid deficiency and birth defects

• Folic acid, B6, and/or B12’s role in preventing heart disease

• Iron deficiency effects in the young (children)

• Vitamin D status and supplementation in the older population

VITAMINS, MINERALS & HERBS IN EXERCISE PERFORMANCE

Possible sub-topics

• Iron deficiency & anemia in female athletes

• Coenzyme Q10 and exercise performance OR Ginseng supplementation and exercise performance

• Vanadium and body composition

• Antioxidant supplementation (such as vitamin E and vitamin C) and exercise

• Medium-chained triglycerides (MCTs) supplementation and exercise performance/body comp

NUFS/KIN 163 – Physical Fitness and Nutrition, Spring 2022, San Jose State University

Revised 012422

4

SUGGESTED TOPICS FOR FITNESS PRESENTATIONS
Please choose from this list or choose your own topic (topic must be approved by instructor)

EXERCISE AND AGING

Possible sub-topics:

• Effects of training on muscle strength and/or muscle mass of older adults, including underlying mechanisms

• Effects of training on cardiovascular function in older adults, including underlying mechanisms

• Effects of exercise and aging on changes in flexibility and mobility

• Effects of training on body composition of older adults.

• Exercise and the prevention of falls in older adults, as well as other changes in balance and equilibrium

EXERCISE AND COGNITION

Possible sub-topics:

• Effects of exercise on learning and/or learning disorders

• Effects of exercise on memory

• Exercise and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

• Exercise and prevention/treatment of Alzheimer’s disease and/or dementia

EXERCISE PRESCRIPTION FOR DIVERSE POPULATIONS

Possible sub-topics

• Exercise and prevention or treatment of Type II diabetes

• Exercise and prevention or treatment of hypertension

• Exercise and prevention or treatment of cancer

• Effects of strength training OR aerobic training on metabolic syndrome

• Effects of training on women during pregnancy OR effects of training post-pregnancy

EXERCISE IN DIVERSE ENVIRONMENTS

Possible sub-topics :

• Environmental impact on individuals exercising in the heat

• Environmental impact on individuals exercising in cold environments

• Environmental impact on individuals exercising in water environments

TRAINING CONSIDERATIONS

Possible sub-topics

• Effects of detraining on cardiovascular fitness or muscular fitness

• Effects of strength training on cardiovascular function

• Effects of overtraining

• Effects of strength training on improving fat utilization

• Effects of cardio training on body fat location and utilization

• Pre or Post exercise supplementation with fat, carbs or protein

EMOTIONAL/SOCIAL

Possible sub-topics

• Effect of physical activity on sleep OR stress

• Effect of physical activity on mood

• Effect of physical activity on anxiety

• Effect of physical activity on depression

NUFS/KIN 163 – Physical Fitness and Nutrition, Spring 2022, San Jose State University

Revised 012422

5

NUFS/KIN 163 GRADING CRITERIA

FOR RESEARCH ANALYSIS

“A” papers (receiving 90% or more of the total points) have the following characteristics:

• Carefully follow the content guidelines given by the instructor; responding to each question with descriptions and
critique for all components of the study;

• Carefully follow the guidelines for format; which includes not exceeding by more than one-half page the
maximum double-spaced pages allowed;

• Are written in standard English, at an upper division college level, with complete sentences and appropriate
paragraphs;

• Are written in the student’s own words, with no direct quotes or copied material;

• Are free of redundancies, and have, at most, only 2-3 spelling and/or grammatical errors;

• Develop each section of the critique in a clear and logical fashion; have smooth transitions from one sentence or
idea to another;

• Include insightful interpretation that goes beyond the obvious or what the authors disclosed;

• Cover all of the major aspects of the assignment without going off track or padding;

• Are turned in on the due date and time.

“B” papers (receiving 80-89% of the total points) usually differ from an “A” report in one or more of the following ways:

• Show less care in following the guidelines;

• Have a few lapses in good writing;

• Have less than full clarity in expression of ideas and interpretations;

• Show some tendency to go off track, pad the paper or have redundancies;

• Are old studies, published more than 10 years ago

• Are turned in one day or partial day late.

“C” papers (receiving 70-79% of the total points) usually differ from an “A” paper in 2 or more of the following ways:

• Show minimal care in following guidelines, leaving several components unaddressed;

• Have more than a few lapses in good writing;

• Use some ambiguous descriptions in the analysis or interpretation;

• Go off track, pad the paper, or have redundancy in more than one instance;

• Provide direct quotes rather than summarizing and/or paraphrasing;

• Are old studies, published more than 10 years ago

• Are turned in two days after the due date/time.

Papers less than “C” (receiving less than 70% of the total points) usually differ from an “A” paper in more than one of the

following ways:

• Do not follow guidelines, or do not address several of the required components;

• Are poorly written;

• Fail to interpret information correctly, or answer questions clearly;

• Frequently wander off track, are “padded” with extraneous information, or are redundant;

• Are old studies, published more than 10 years ago for nutrition, or 20 years for fitness

• Are turned in more than two days after the due date/time.

REMEMBER TO CONSULT THE GRADING RUBRIC FOR SUCCESS!

NUFS/KIN 163 – Physical Fitness and Nutrition, Spring 2022, San Jose State University

Revised 012422

6

Name _____________________________________

GRADING SHEET FOR ANALYSIS OF LITERATURE #1 & #2

CATEGORY

Followed directions,

originality report

obtained, format

Major flaws in

following directions,

format.

Followed some, but

not all directions;

and/or some

formatting errors.

Excellent format.

Possible Points 0-1 2-4 5

Writing, syntax, spelling,

grammar

Major flaws in

writing, syntax,

spelling and/or

grammar

Some errors in

writing, syntax,

spelling and/or

grammar

Well written.

Possible Points 0-5 6-8 9-10

Poor; showed lack

of understanding

Average Very good-excellent

Shows high level

understanding

Question 1 Stated research

problem clearly.

0-1 2-3 4

Question 2 Described

hypothesis/research

question/goal clearly.

0-2 3-4 5

Question 3 Described

participants and inclusion/

exclusion criteria

0-1 1.5 2-3

Question 4 Described the

study design

0-2 3-4 5-6

Question 5 Described the

results clearly

0-2 3-4 5-6

Question 6 Stated the

results relative to the

hypothesis

0 1 2

Question 7 Described

limitations and strengths

0-1 1.5 2-3

Question 8 Described

conclusions, future research

ideas and applications(s)

0-2 3-4 5-6

Subtotal

2.5 points will be deducted for each calendar day or partial day late Deductions (if late): ___________

Your Total: ___________

NUFS/KIN 163 – Physical Fitness and Nutrition, Spring 2022, San Jose State University

Revised 012422

7

GUIDELINES FOR ORAL PRESENTATION OF ANALYSIS OF SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE #2

This is a group presentation where each member presents the study he/she selected and wrote about for the Analysis of

Scientific Literature #2 assignment. Each individual in the group should spend approximately 5 to 6 minutes leading a

discussion on his/her own article from the group’s agreed upon topic. Having each individual present their own article on

the same topic allows the overall group presentation to cover a variety of angles on the subject matter.

Presentation

• The presentation should begin with a brief introduction of the topic. This is often done by just one person and is not
considered part of his/her formal presentation.

• Each student’s introductory slide must contain a full APA reference for the research study including authors, year,
title, journal name, volume and pages.

• The presentation should include an evaluation (critique) of the research article including the purpose of the research,
methodology, results, conclusions, strengths/limitations, and applications to the “real” world. Students are encouraged

to evaluate studies that provide differing results.

• Students should be creative and use any or all of the following in their presentations: demonstrations, visual aides
(overheads, charts, handouts), and other techniques to inform and interest the audience. Students should practice oral

presentation etiquette which includes addressing and greeting the audience, introducing yourself and the study,

looking at the camera/audience instead of directly reading off of the slides.

• Once each student presents his/her own paper, the group will then need to compare and contrast their studies. This is
best done with each group member synthesizing their study results with the others and end with a “bottom line” type

of take away and conclusion. This is not a restatement of study characteristics (i.e., participant statistics, study

location, intervention type, etc.).

• This is a group assignment; therefore, each member should collaborate on the introduction, compare/contrast and the
conclusion.

Oral Presentation Slides & Recording: Both the slides and a recording of the presentation need to be uploaded to

Canvas. Only one group member needs to submit these because the assignment is listed as a group assignment and files

will show up in each member’s Canvas as submitted.

Evaluation of the oral presentation will be based on the following and a rubric is included with this

assignment:

1. Presentation skills (including adherence to time guidelines; organization of presentation/preparedness;
effectiveness of oral presentation (e.g., delivered without excessive reliance on notes); and effective use of visual

aids/ability to interest audience).

2. Ability to critically evaluate scientific research;
3. Ability to define/demonstrate practical application of the material;
4. Appropriateness of nutrition/fitness article;
5. Ability to compare & contrast article with other articles in group, contribution to group summary, conclusions and

“take away.”

This assignment is worth a total of 50 points, up to 25 points for each student’s individual presentation and up to 25 points

for a group grade. The group grade is calculated as the average of the group’s individual scores. This means that the total

score for each person is dependent upon the others in the group. To be most successful, communicate with your group

early on and commit to a schedule.

NUFS/KIN 163 – Physical Fitness and Nutrition, Spring 2022, San Jose State University

Revised 012422

8

Student Name:_______________________________ Date:__________________________

1. Presentation (Adherence to time guidelines; organization of presentation/preparedness; effectiveness of oral presentation

(delivered without excessive note reading; effective use of visual aids/ability to interest audience)

Poor Adequate Good Very Good Excellent

0-1 2 3 4 5

2. Ability to critically evaluate scientific research

Unacceptable/Poor Needs improvement Good Very good Excellent

No attempt to

evaluate study or

evaluative

statements

unsupported or

inappropriate

Student’s opinion of

the article is not

clear; critical

thinking is not

evident

Student’s opinion of the

article is stated, along with

critical evaluation of the

article’s premise and/or

argument, but some

significant points are

overlooked

Includes critical

thinking that clearly

states the student’s

opinion and some

evaluation of the

article’s premise

and/or arguments but

overlooks some points

Includes critical

thinking that clearly

states the student’s

informed and

substantiated opinion,

thorough evaluation of

the article’s premise,

and supporting points

0-1 2-3 4-6 7-9 10

3. Ability to define/demonstrate practical application of material

Unacceptable/Poor Needs improvement Good Very good Excellent

No attempt made to

describe context of

study or practical

application of

material

Attempt made to

discuss practical

application but

missed the mark

Good attempt made to

discuss practical application

but could be improved

Practical application of

material clearly

described

Practical application

of material very

clearly described by

providing a number of

examples

0 1 2 3 4

4. Appropriateness of nutrition/fitness article

Poor Needs improvement Good Very good Excellent

0 .5 1.5 1.75 2

5. Ability to compare/contrast article with other group articles, contribution to group summary/conclusions and “take away”

Poor Below average Average Very good Excellent

Student fails to

mention how article

compares and

contrasts with

others’ article;

demonstrates low or

non-existent level of

understanding

regarding how

article chosen fits in

with other articles;

fails to include

article in

introduction and

conclusion.

Student fails to

mention how article

compares and

contrasts with others’

article or does not

correctly put article

in context;

demonstrates low

level of

understanding

regarding how article

chosen fits in with

other articles; fails to

include article in

introduction and

conclusion

Student does an adequate

job explaining how article

compares and contrasts with

others’ article; demonstrates

average level of

understanding regarding

how article chosen fits in

with other articles; fails to

include article in

introduction and/or

conclusion.

Student does a very

good job explaining

how article compares

and contrasts with

others’ article;

demonstrates good but

not great level of

understanding

regarding how article

chosen fits in with

other articles; includes

article in introduction

and conclusion.

Student does an

excellent and thorough

job explaining how

article compares and

contrasts with others’

article; demonstrates

high level of

understanding

regarding how article

chosen fits in with

other articles; includes

article in introduction

and conclusion.

0 1 2 3 4

Total Points – Individual __________ / 25

Total Points – Group Average __________ / 25

GRAND TOTAL POINTS __________ / 50

NUFS/KIN 163 – Physical Fitness and Nutrition, Spring 2022, San Jose State University

Revised 012422

9

CONSUMER PRODUCT: FITNESS & NUTRITION

Purpose of the Assignment: to evaluate an electronic advertisement in a way that the student becomes

a more critical consumer. The advertisement will be evaluated by comparing the claims made in the ad

to scientific evidence and research findings.

Ad Selection: For Nutrition, your instructor will provide two options, along with their URLs in the

Assignment itself on Canvas. You will choose which one you want to research for this paper. For

Fitness, you will also be provided the URL of the fitness ad on Canvas. If you opt to do this, make sure

to pick an advertisement that has some substance to it, the less the ad says, the harder it is to critique.

Original advertisements should not come from library sources or magazines.

Assignment Format:

Page 1: Title page with the product name/advertisement

Pages 2 to 4 (or 5): Consumer Product Analysis

This section contains your analysis of both the ad itself and the product advertised. Evaluating the ad

itself is very important however the primary purpose of this paper is evaluating the product and whether

there is research to support its claims. The paper should be 3-4 pages. You should comment on the
positive aspects (praise) and the negative aspects (criticism) of the ad. Your analysis should be in

paragraph form, and critical comments should be well developed and substantiated (cited) by the

research studies you use for this assignment. When discussing scientific articles to analyze the product,

do NOT use direct quotes or copied material from the scientific articles. Instead, paraphrase the

information in your own words and cite appropriately in APA format. In the text of your paper, the

author & year of the scientific source should be indicated. When more than two authors are cited, “et

al.,” may be used as per APA format (however, remember to include all names on Reference Page.).

See example below:

According to Maughan et al. (2013), creatine supplementation has been shown to significantly increase

total body mass in subjects over a 4-week period.

When discussing the advertisement or product description, you may make limited use of short

quotations (<40 words) from the ad or product description, but they should be in APA format and cited

properly with page numbers, and author/year.

When critically evaluating the advertisement, comment on the text, and use of color and graphics.

You need to include comments about all of the following questions:

• Who appears to be the intended consumer?

• What techniques are used to draw the attention of the reader? Are they successful or not? Again,
consider wording, terminology, graphics and more.

• Is the ad straightforward and factual? Explain.

• Is any important information omitted that should be disclosed to the consumer?

• What gimmicks are used to sell the product? Were the gimmicks successful?

When critically evaluating the product, incorporate responses to all of the following questions but do

not limit your critique to the questions below. This product evaluation should make up the majority of

the paper.

• Is the use of this product supported by scientific evidence? If so, are there any conflicting results
among various studies? Do the subjects’ age, health condition, fitness level, etc. match those for

whom the ad is directed? Were there limitations and/or flaws in these studies? Describe the studies,

NUFS/KIN 163 – Physical Fitness and Nutrition, Spring 2022, San Jose State University

Revised 012422

10

in your own words, to defend your statements and give evidence for or against the claims made in

the ad.

• What, if any, contribution would the consumption or use of the product make to the nutrient intake,
physique, or fitness level of the intended consumer?

• How much does the product cost? Could some less expensive product be used to obtain the same
results? If so, what?

• What hazards/adverse effects might be associated with the use of this product? Are there any
conditions (e.g., medical, age-related) that would contraindicate the use of the product?

The Consumer Product paper is aimed to analyze the product and provide research studies to

demonstrate support, or lack thereof, of the product’s claims. This might necessitate a detailed

discussion of the study if relevant to the product directly. You should avoid summarizing the studies

independent from one another and the product.

Page 5 or 6: References

This is a separate page and should be headed “References” at the top center of the page.

List the source of the advertisement, and alphabetically list the references used to support your

evaluation. Do not alphabetize “within” each reference by changing the original order of authors.

However, alphabetize your order among the various references, using the last name of the 1 st author of

each reference.

You may use the course textbooks. However, in addition, you must use at least 3 other reliable (peer

reviewed) journal references to support your analysis. References need to be current (published

within the last 10 years) and must be cited in the evaluation. Give the full publication information of

each reference used, including all author(s), title of article and journal or title of book, year of

publication, volume or edition, and page number(s).

Indentation – Although the current Publication Manual advises standard (five spaces, first line)

indentation for the reference list, this is primarily designed to make typesetting easier; the typeset

version will have hanging indents (first line flush left, following lines five spaces indent). We

recommend for this paper that you use hanging indents for enhanced readability. We