Canadian Adolescent and Young Athletes Knowledge of Pain-relieving medications
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Purpose: Adolescent knowledge of pain-relieving medications (PRM) and opioids is scant, particularly from a Canadian perspective. Research indicates that athletes will often resort to PRM and opioids to manage their pain, but it is unknown whether athletes are fully informed as to its use and misuse including adverse events that may occur. The purpose of this study is to understand what elite level male athletes know about use, contraindications, and recommendations of pain-relieving medications; particularly opioids to manage their pain. Methods: Using a qualitative, grounded theory approach, we interviewed male athletes to understand their level of knowledge regarding pain-relieving medications, particularly opioids. Athletes were approached through their coaches/teams and after receiving consent (assent from those under the age of 18) were informed of their rights as a participate. Ethical approval was received from Sheridan College’s REB. Results: Eight male athletes (aged 15-23 years, SD=3.01) who were involved in elite level basketball and lacrosse were interviewed. From the data, 4 themes emerged: 1) Athletes lacked formal education on pain-relieving medication including opioids ; 2) Athletes were influenced by coaches, peers, culture and health care providers on whether to use pain-relieving medications; 3) Athletes trusted guardians, Athletic Therapists affiliated with teams, and coaches to provide advice regarding use of pain-relieving medications; 4) Athletes understood that pain was a “part of the game”. Conclusions: Athletes lacked understanding of the use of pain-relieving medications including opioids and indicated that under certain circumstances, their use would be appropriate. As a result, athletes may engage in misuse of pain-relieving medications without fully understanding their appropriate use or consequences. Their sources of information on PRM and opioids range from coaches, peers, internet, culture, parents/guardians, and Athletic Therapists. The information found in this study is important for health care providers to provide opportunities to educate athletes on the use of pain-relieving medications. Athlete’s misuse of pain-relieving medication without the health care providers knowledge can have implications such as faulty assessment, diagnosis, and management of injuries, potentially creating opportunities for further harm.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».