Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Nov 13;8(11):e78702.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0078702. eCollection 2013.

Associations between physical and cognitive doping--a cross-sectional study in 2.997 triathletes

Pavel Dietz  1 , Rolf Ulrich, Robert Dalaker, Heiko Striegel, Andreas G Franke, Klaus Lieb, Perikles Simon
Affiliations

Associations between physical and cognitive doping--a cross-sectional study in 2.997 triathletes

Pavel Dietz et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Purpose: This study assessed, for the first time, prevalence estimates for physical and cognitive doping within a single collective of athletes using the randomized response technique (RRT). Furthermore, associations between the use of legal and freely available substances to improve physical and cognitive performance (enhancement) and illicit or banned substances to improve physical and cognitive performance (doping) were examined.

Methods: An anonymous questionnaire using the unrelated question RRT was used to survey 2,997 recreational triathletes in three sports events (Frankfurt, Regensburg, and Wiesbaden) in Germany. Prior to the survey, statistical power analyses were performed to determine sample size. Logistic regression was used to predict physical and cognitive enhancement and the bootstrap method was used to evaluate differences between the estimated prevalences of physical and cognitive doping.

Results: 2,987 questionnaires were returned (99.7%). 12-month prevalences for physical and cognitive doping were 13.0% and 15.1%, respectively. The prevalence estimate for physical doping was significantly higher in athletes who also used physical enhancers, as well as in athletes who took part in the European Championship in Frankfurt compared to those who did not. The prevalence estimate for cognitive doping was significantly higher in athletes who also used physical and cognitive enhancers. Moreover, the use of physical and cognitive enhancers were significantly associated and also the use of physical and cognitive doping.

Discussion: The use of substances to improve physical and cognitive performance was associated on both levels of legality (enhancement vs. doping) suggesting that athletes do not use substances for a specific goal but may have a general propensity to enhance. This finding is important for understanding why people use such substances. Consequently, more effective prevention programs against substance abuse and doping could be developed.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

References

    1. Dietz P, Striegel H, Franke AG, Lieb K, Simon P, et al. (2013) Randomized response estimates for the 12-month prevalence of cognitive-enhancing drug use in university students. Pharmacotherapy 33: 44–50. - PubMed
    1. Maher B (2008) Poll results: look who’s doping. Nature 452: 674–675. - PubMed
    1. Simon P, Striegel H, Aust F, Dietz K, Ulrich R (2006) Doping in fitness sports: estimated number of unreported cases and individual probability of doping. Addiction 101: 1640–1644. - PubMed
    1. Striegel H, Ulrich R, Simon P (2010) Randomized response estimates for doping and illicit drug use in elite athletes. Drug Alcohol Depend 106: 230–232. - PubMed
    1. World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) (2012) Prohibited List 2013. Available: http://www.wada-ama.org/Documents/World_Anti-Doping_Program/WADP-Prohibi.... Accessed 08 January 2013.

Publication types

Substances