MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4391881452 · doi:10.3389/fspor.2024.1378777

Editorial: Athlete vulnerabilities and doping

2024· editorial· en· W4391881452 sur OpenAlexaff
Kim Nolte, Angela Schneider

Notice bibliographique

RevueFrontiers in Sports and Active Living · 2024
Typeeditorial
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueDoping in Sports
Établissements canadiensWestern University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPolitical science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

This Research Topic comprises of six articles. It is not surprising that two of the articles relate to supplement use. Athlete supplement use has been regarded as a doping "gateway".Athlete's supplement consumption may increase doping risks through the development and acceptance of routine substance use to improve sporting performance (Barkoukis et al., 2015;Yager & Mclean, 2020). Furthermore, supplement use in athletes can also result in inadvertent doping due to supplement contamination or the uneducated use of supplements that contain prohibited substances. In the review by Yasuda et al. (2023) the authors summarize how the "meal first" strategy and planned supplement use are important for enhancing athletes' health and performance. The "meal first" strategy is recommended for athletes' conditioning, however there are a few instances when appropriate supplement use can be beneficial to athletes such in the case of nutrient deficiencies, inaccessibility of quality food during travel and difficulty preparing food due to societal restrictions, to mention a few (Yasudo et al., 2023). In a quantitative analysis of factors which influence supplement use and doping among adolescent athletes in New Zealand, Clancy et al. (2023) identified factors that decrease adolescent's chances of doping. To reduce the risk of doping, the researchers suggest attention should be given to increasing athlete's exposure to mastery as a confidence source, reducing focus on appearance and supporting volition/internally perceived locus of control (Clancy et al., 2023).When it comes to vulnerability to doping, vulnerability is not constant and can change during the athlete's sporting career or athlete pathway. Thus, it is also important to understand how vulnerability may change, and thus, when specific interventions may be necessary or beneficial to decrease vulnerability and potential doping violations. The results of the research by Veltmaat et al. (2023) showed that athletes believed that 'clean' and 'doping' athletes are not always distinguished by the values they hold. Therefore, all athletes can be vulnerable to doping at some point. Further strengthening the point of view that vulnerability is not constant. The researchers concluded that vulnerability is a balance between risks and protective factors in a complex interaction between environmental, personal and situational influences (Veltmaat et al., 2023).Educational interventions are another area of focus of the World Anti-doping Agency (WADA). Some research has shown that many athletes do not have sufficient knowledge regarding doping / anti-doping, which has significant consequences given the 'strict liability' rules. Lack of knowledge may then lead to possible doping violations. Murofushi et al.(2023) investigated subjective and objective anti-doping knowledge in Japanese University students and found that there was a discrepancy between subjective and objective anti-doping knowledge. Athletes perceived themselves to have adequate anti-doping knowledge however objective measures indicated otherwise. The researchers suggest targeted educational interventions to align subjective and objective anti-doping knowledge. Even if athletes recognize doping as wrongful, insufficient knowledge may inadvertently influence behavioral intentions, potentially leading to unintentional doping. The researchers also investigated the willingness to learn and objective anti-doping knowledge in the same cohort (Japanese University students) and found no relationship between willingness to learn and objective anti-doping knowledge. Although no relationship was determined in this study, the results did show that the athletes had insufficient knowledge regarding doping and that educational interventions were warranted (Murofushi et al., 2023).Lastly, an article by Pavot, 2023 further highlights the challenges and complex struggle to combat doping in sport and to ensure all athletes are able to compete within a fair environment. The article discusses the potential gap or lacuna in the World Anti-Doping

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,005
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Éditorial · Signal consensuel: Éditorial
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,038
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,128

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0050,027
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0050,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0040,003
Bibliométrie0,0040,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0040,002
Communication savante0,0070,004
Science ouverte0,0030,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0150,015
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0380,025

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,007
Tête enseignante GPT0,267
Écart entre enseignants0,261 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreÉditorial

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations3
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueFrontiers in Sports and Active Living→Même sujetDoping in Sports→Travaux en français237 207→