The Use and Abuse of Painkillers in International Soccer
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is known that in professional men's soccer the consumption of prescription medication is high. PURPOSE: The intake of medication in female and adolescent male soccer players has not yet been investigated. STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive epidemiology study. MATERIAL: Team physicians reported 10,456 uses of medication 72 hours before each match in 2488 soccer players participating in 6 international soccer tournaments. RESULTS: The use of a total of 6577 medical substances was reported, leading to an average intake of 0.63 substances per player per match (under-17s, 0.51; under-20s, 0.51; women, 1.0; P < or = .001 [without contraceptive medication, 0.85; P < .001]). Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were the most commonly prescribed type of medication in all tournaments. Women's soccer had the highest percentage of players using nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs per match (under-17s, 17.3%; under-20s, 21.4%; women, 30.7%; P < or = .001). Relatively few players were taking beta(2)-agonists for the treatment of asthma (under-17s, 1.3%; under-20s, 1.3%; women, 4.3%; P < or = .001). CONCLUSION: These findings highlight the existing problem of excessive medication use in international top-level women's and male youth soccer nearly to the same extent as in men's soccer. Further steps need to be taken to understand the rationale underlying the sports physicians' practice and to plan educational programs to avoid the abuse of prescription medication. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Continued abuse of medication may otherwise not only negatively influence the quality of the game but also the health status of the players.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it