Abstract

PurposeThis study assessed the prevalence of physical and cognitive doping in recreational triathletes with two different randomized response models, that is, the Cheater Detection Model (CDM) and the Unrelated Question Model (UQM). Since both models have been employed in assessing doping, the major objective of this study was to investigate whether the estimates of these two models converge.Material and MethodsAn anonymous questionnaire was distributed to 2,967 athletes at two triathlon events (Frankfurt and Wiesbaden, Germany). Doping behavior was assessed either with the CDM (Frankfurt sample, one Wiesbaden subsample) or the UQM (one Wiesbaden subsample). A generalized likelihood-ratio test was employed to check whether the prevalence estimates differed significantly between models. In addition, we compared the prevalence rates of the present survey with those of a previous study on a comparable sample.ResultsAfter exclusion of incomplete questionnaires and outliers, the data of 2,017 athletes entered the final data analysis. Twelve-month prevalence for physical doping ranged from 4% (Wiesbaden, CDM and UQM) to 12% (Frankfurt CDM), and for cognitive doping from 1% (Wiesbaden, CDM) to 9% (Frankfurt CDM). The generalized likelihood-ratio test indicated no differences in prevalence rates between the two methods. Furthermore, there were no significant differences in prevalences between the present (undertaken in 2014) and the previous survey (undertaken in 2011), although the estimates tended to be smaller in the present survey.DiscussionThe results suggest that the two models can provide converging prevalence estimates. The high rate of cheaters estimated by the CDM, however, suggests that the present results must be seen as a lower bound and that the true prevalence of doping might be considerably higher.

Highlights

  • Recent surveys concerning substance use in sports indicate an alarming prevalence of the use of drugs enhancing physical and cognitive performance in both elite and recreational athletes [1,2,3,4,5]

  • Twelve-month prevalence for physical doping ranged from 4% (Wiesbaden, Cheater Detection Model (CDM) and Unrelated Question Model (UQM)) to 12% (Frankfurt CDM), and for cognitive doping from 1% (Wiesbaden, CDM) to 9% (Frankfurt CDM)

  • Physical and Cognitive Doping in Recreational Triathletes - A Follow-Up Study previous survey, the estimates tended to be smaller in the present survey

Read more

Summary

Material and Methods

Data Availability Statement: All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files. An anonymous questionnaire was distributed to 2,967 athletes at two triathlon events (Frankfurt and Wiesbaden, Germany). Doping behavior was assessed either with the CDM (Frankfurt sample, one Wiesbaden subsample) or the UQM (one Wiesbaden subsample). A generalized likelihood-ratio test was employed to check whether the prevalence estimates differed significantly between models. We compared the prevalence rates of the present survey with those of a previous study on a comparable sample

Results
Discussion
Introduction
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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 call