Doping Prevalence among US Elite Athletes Subject to Drug Testing under the World Anti-Doping Code

被引:0
|
作者
Davoren, Ann Kearns [1 ]
Rulison, Kelly [1 ]
Milroy, Jeff [2 ]
Grist, Pauline [2 ]
Fedoruk, Matthew [3 ]
Lewis, Laura [3 ]
Wyrick, David [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Prevent Strategies, Greensboro, NC 27412 USA
[2] Univ North Carolina Greensboro, Greensboro, NC USA
[3] US Antidoping Agcy USADA, Colorado Springs, CO USA
关键词
Doping prevalence; Performance enhancing drugs; Athletes; RANDOMIZED-RESPONSE; SENSITIVE QUESTIONS;
D O I
10.1186/s40798-024-00721-9
中图分类号
G8 [体育];
学科分类号
04 ; 0403 ;
摘要
Background Determining the prevalence of doping within an elite athlete population is challenging due to the extreme sensitivity of the topic; however, understanding true doping prevalence is important when designing anti-doping programs and measuring their effectiveness. The objective of this study was to estimate the prevalence of doping among Olympic, Paralympic, World, and National-level competitive athletes in the United States subject to the World Anti-Doping Code. All athletes who were subject to the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency's Protocol for Olympic and Paralympic Movement Testing, a World Anti-Doping Code ("Code")-compliant anti-doping program, were invited to complete a web-delivered survey. Using a direct questioning approach, the survey items asked athletes whether they had used each specific category of banned substance / method on the World Anti-Doping Agency's Prohibited List. Multiple strategies to encourage honest reporting (e.g., protecting anonymity by collecting minimal demographic information; using an outside organization to administer the survey) and to detect inconsistent responses were used.Results Depending on the method of calculation, 6.5-9.2% of the 1,398 respondents reported using one or more prohibited substances or methods in the 12 months prior to survey administration. Specific doping prevalence rates for each individual substance / method categories ranged from 0.1% (for both diuretics / masking agents and stem cell / gene editing) to 4.2% for in-competition use of cannabinoids.Conclusion Determining the prevalence of doping within different athlete populations is critical so that sport governing bodies can evaluate their anti-doping efforts and better tailor their programming. By measuring doping prevalence of specific categories of substances and methods, rather than just the overall prevalence of doping, this study also highlights where sport governing bodies should focus their future educational and detection efforts. Estimated doping prevalence among U.S. elite athletes ranged from 6.5 to 9.2%.The most prevalent category of doping was in-competition use of cannabinoids (at 4.2%), whereas the least prevalent categories of doping were diuretics or masking agents (0.1%), stem cell or gene editing (0.1%), narcotics (0.2%), and hormone and metabolic modulators (0.2%).Of the athletes who reported doping, most reported using only one substance or method.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Effectiveness of the world anti-doping agency's e-learning programme for anti-doping education on knowledge of, explicit and implicit attitudes towards, and likelihood of doping among Chinese college athletes and non-athletes
    Zhangyan Deng
    Jinyang Guo
    Dong Wang
    Tao Huang
    Zuosong Chen
    [J]. Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy, 17
  • [22] The winner takes it all! Reflections on the world anti-doping code and the possible criminalisation of doping in sport
    Stevens, G. P.
    [J]. DE JURE, 2013, 46 (02) : 592 - 600
  • [23] World anti-doping regulations for 2005: essential changes for athletes and physicians
    C. Pabinger
    G. Gruber
    [J]. Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, 2006, 126 : 286 - 288
  • [24] Effectiveness of the world anti-doping agency's e-learning programme for anti-doping education on knowledge of, explicit and implicit attitudes towards, and likelihood of doping among Chinese college athletes and non-athletes
    Deng, Zhangyan
    Guo, Jinyang
    Wang, Dong
    Huang, Tao
    Chen, Zuosong
    [J]. SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT PREVENTION AND POLICY, 2022, 17 (01)
  • [25] True Dopers or Negligent Athletes? An Analysis of Anti-Doping Rule Violations Reported to the World Anti-Doping Agency 2010-2012
    de Hon, Olivier
    van Bottenburg, Maarten
    [J]. SUBSTANCE USE & MISUSE, 2017, 52 (14) : 1932 - 1936
  • [26] Subjective and actual anti-doping knowledge among japanese university athletes
    Murofushi, Yuka
    Kamihigash, Etsuko
    Kawata, Yujiro
    Yamaguchi, Shinji
    Takazawa, Yuji
    Naito, Hisashi
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPORT AND EXERCISE PSYCHOLOGY, 2021, 19 : S425 - S426
  • [27] Breaking down the process for determining a basic sanction under the 2015 World Anti-Doping Code
    Rigozzi, Antonio
    Haas, Ulrich
    Wisnosky, Emily
    Viret, Marjolaine
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL SPORTS LAW JOURNAL, 2015, 15 (1-2): : 3 - 48
  • [28] Elite athletes' values in action: an important yet complicated aspect in anti-doping education
    Petroczi, Andrea
    Martinelli, Laura A.
    Thrower, Sam N.
    Veltmaat, Annalena
    Heyes, Andrew
    Barkoukis, Vassilis
    Bondarev, Dmitriy
    Elbe, Anne-Marie
    Lazuras, Lambros
    Mallia, Luca
    Zelli, Arnaldo
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPORT AND EXERCISE PSYCHOLOGY, 2024,
  • [29] Rheumatological prescribing in athletes: a review of the new World Anti-Doping Agency guidelines
    Smith, R
    Barnsley, L
    Kannangara, S
    Mace, A
    [J]. RHEUMATOLOGY, 2004, 43 (12) : 1473 - 1475
  • [30] Mass spectrometry and illicit drug testing:: analytical of the anti-doping laboratories
    Botre, Francesco
    [J]. EXPERT REVIEW OF PROTEOMICS, 2008, 5 (04) : 535 - 539