Cannabidiol (CBD) use among Canadian U Sport student-athletes: patterns, purposes, benefits and barriers of use.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To characterize the rationale and use of cannabidiol (CBD) among Canadian University (U) Sport student-athletes.Methods: A 62 question web-based survey was developed and administered to 434 (64% women) Canadian U Sport student-athletes aged 18-25 years old. The survey included mostly closed-ended questions assessing student-athlete characteristics (i.e., age, sex, gender, sport, competition level) as well questions about CBD awareness, sources of information, frequency of use, reasons for use/non-use, perceived benefits, dosing strategy, and adverse effects. Quantitative analysis was primarily carried out through descriptive statistics, Spearman's Rank Correlation, and the Mann-Whitney U test. Influence of demographic variables (i.e., age, sex, sport, geography, and competition level) was investigated using independent t-tests, chi square tests and analysis of variance where appropriate. Results: A total of 82 participants (18.9%) indicated they had used CBD, with 29 (6.7%) reporting being a current CBD user. Gender, province, sport, competition timing or competition level were not different between CBD users and non-users (all p > 0.05). The primary reasons student-athletes reported using CBD was to improve relaxation (86.6%), improve sleep (78.8%), or to reduce anxiety (69.5%). The average duration of CBD use was 1.38 years with a tendency for sporadic, rather than regular use. Despite concerns about doping violations, most CBD users indicated that they would likely continue using CBD in the future (70.4%). Information about CBD was primarily acquired from informal sources (i.e., internet, friends, and family) rather than from health professionals. Conclusion: Canadian U Sport student-athletes self-reported using CBD products for the purpose of improving relaxation, improving sleep, and reducing anxiety. Future research should focus on providing an evidence-based approach to CBD education, and investigate the efficacy of CBD on relaxation, sleep and anxiety among university student-athletes
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".