Abstract
Despite decades of literature on (de)hydration in healthy individuals, many unanswered questions remain. To outline research and policy priorities, it is fundamental to recognize the literature trends on (de)hydration and identify current research gaps, which herein we aimed to pinpoint. From a representative sample of 180 (de)hydration studies with 4350 individuals, we found that research is mainly limited to small-scale laboratory-based sample sizes, with high variability in demographics (sex, age, and level of competition); to non-ecological (highly simulated and controlled) conditions; and with a focus on recreationally active male adults (e.g., Tier 1, non-athletes). The laboratory-simulated environments are limiting factors underpinning the need to better translate scientific research into field studies. Although, consistently, dehydration is defined as the loss of 2% of body weight, the hydration status is estimated using a very heterogeneous range of parameters. Water is the most researched hydration fluid, followed by alcoholic beverages with added carbohydrates (CHO). The current research still overlooks beverages supplemented with proteins, amino acids (AA), and glycerol. Future research should invest more effort in "real-world" studies with larger and more heterogeneous cohorts, exploring the entire available spectrum of fluids while addressing hydration outcomes more harmoniously.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
