ArticlePloS one2016
Sport-Induced Substance Use-An Empirical Study to the Extent within a German Sports Association.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Doping Prevalence in Sport from Indirect Estimation Models: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Sports medicine - open · 2026Pooled it
- Charting the Scientific Landscape of Indirect Estimation Models in Doping Prevalence Research: A Bibliometric Analysis with Narrative Appraisal.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Performance-enhancing drug use in sports: a Bayesian variable selection and profile regression approach to identifying risk factors and estimating prevalence.Substance abuse treatment, prevention, and policy · 2026Article
- Modeling Evasive Response Bias in Randomized Response: Cheater Detection Versus Self-protective No-Saying.Psychometrika · 2024Article
- Recreational Athletes' Use of Performance-Enhancing Substances: Results from the First European Randomized Response Technique Survey.Sports medicine - open · 2023Article
- Sex differences in the consumption of over-the-counter analgesics among amateur volleyball players.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2021Article
- Effects of Appearance- and Performance-Enhancing Drugs on Personality Traits.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2021Review
- Analysis of doping control test results in individual and team sports from 2003 to 2015.Journal of sport and health science · 2020Article
- The Prevalence of Legal Performance-Enhancing Substance Use and Potential Cognitive and or Physical Doping in German Recreational Triathletes, Assessed via the Randomised Response Technique.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- Doping in Two Elite Athletics Competitions Assessed by Randomized-Response Surveys.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In cooperation with the Sports Association of the Palatinate (SBP), a survey was conducted on substance use by recreational and amateur athletes. Distribution of the online questionnaire took place by means of chain-referral sampling, and questions on substance use were presented using the randomized response technique (RRT) to protect the anonymity of respondents and prevent socially desirable answers. The estimated lowest limit for the population share for use of prohibited substances during the last season (4%) and for lifetime use (3.6%) did not differ significantly. Approximately 21% of respondents had used substances for training or competitions that were taken for a purpose other than performance enhancement (e.g., to improve their mood or to help with recuperation from a minor injury or illness) in the last year. 49% had done so at some point in their life.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.