Hello Alyssarosa and welcome!
Are there any particular sources you'd like to discuss?
If not, and as a great place to start, authors Volek and Phinney have a pair of books that address athletics and endurance with (the equivalent of) intermittent fasting. Their primary point being that (once adapted) a fat-based metabolism is likely superior to a glucose based one for all but HIIT based exertion levels.
We're all biologically limited to a roughly 2,000 calorie based muscle and liver glycogen storage capacity. This is roughly equivalent to that burned by the 20 mile mark ("hitting the wall") in a marathon. For most of us, the energy potential of fat storage is nearly unlimited. A mere three pounds of fat contains over 10,000 burnable calories! That's over 5x the available glucose base. The down side? The full transition to a keytone-based fat-dominant metabolism can take 1-2 months of careful, dedicated effort.
You might also look up Peter Attia's web site for a series of very detailed (alas, somewhat dated) articles on his personal experimentation in this area.
You question regarding "how research is conducted" can get tedious rather quickly. Interpreting the scope and applicability of research and medical studies along with your point of recognizing "different results" is part and parcel of all studies. The more you read the more they tend to conflict. But this is the reality of pursuing leading-edge information. (Consider this: If the researchers actually knew exactly what worked, there would be no conflicting opinions.)
The clarifying solution set here for the individual is to compare your situation with that of the study's participants. The better they match, the greater the possibility that their results might apply to you. The proving tie-breaker is being willing to self-experiment and self-measure if and when a reasonable match (based on your risk/reward assessment) shows promise.
Hope this is helpful.