4.4 Article

Prevalence of use of performance enhancing drugs by fitness centre members

期刊

DRUG TESTING AND ANALYSIS
卷 6, 期 5, 页码 434-438

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/dta.1525

关键词

Doping use; Randomized Response Technique; Prevalence estimates

资金

  1. Anti-Doping Authority of the Netherlands
  2. Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Studies on the use of performance enhancing drugs (PED) in fitness centres rely predominately on conventional survey methods using direct questioning. However, research indicates that direct questioning of sensitive information is characterized by under-reporting. The aim of the present study was to contrast direct questioning of different types of PED use by Dutch fitness centre members with results obtained with the Randomized Response Technique (RRT). Questionnaires were conducted among members of fitness centres. PED were classified into the following categories: anabolic steroids, prohormones, substances to counteract side-effects, growth hormone and/or insulin, stimulants (to reduce weight), and miscellaneous substances. A total of 718 athletes from 92 fitness centres completed the questionnaire. The conventional method resulted in prevalences varying between 0% and 0.4% for the different types of PED with an overall prevalence of 0.4%. RRT resulted in prevalences varying between 0.8% and 4.8% for the different types of PED with an overall prevalence of 8.2%. The overall prevalence of the two survey methods differed significantly. The current study showed that the conventional survey method using direct questioning led to an underestimation of the prevalence. Based on the RRT results, the percentage of users of PED among members of fitness centres is approximately 8.2%. Stimulants to lose weight had the highest prevalence, even higher than anabolic steroids. The key task for future preventive health work is to not only focus on anabolic steroid use, but also include interventions focusing on the use of stimulants to lose weight. Copyright (c) 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据