目的:对兴奋剂意向的心理社会预测因子进行荟萃分析综述,在运动和锻炼环境中使用兴奋剂和无意兴奋剂。
方法:系统评价和荟萃分析。
方法:Scopus,Medline,Embase,心理信息,CINAHLPlus,ProQuest论文/论文和开放灰色。
方法:测量掺杂意向结果变量的研究(任何设计),掺杂使用和/或无意掺杂以及这三个变量中的至少一个社会心理决定因素。
结果:我们纳入了来自25个实验(N=13586)和186个观察样本(N=309130)的研究。实验组报告了较低的掺杂意图(g=-0.21,95%CI(-0.31至-0.12))和掺杂使用(g=-0.08,95%CI(-0.14至-0.03),但不是无意掺杂(g=-0.70,95%CI(-1.95至0.55)),相对于比较者。对于观察性研究,保护因素与掺杂意向呈负相关(z=-0.28,95%CI-0.31至-0.24),掺杂使用(z=-0.09,95%CI-0.13至-0.05)和无意掺杂(z=-0.19,95%CI-0.32至-0.06)。危险因素与兴奋剂意图(z=0.29,95%CI0.26至0.32)和使用(z=0.17,95%CI0.15至0.19)呈正相关,但不是无意掺杂(z=0.08,95%CI-0.06至0.22)。兴奋剂意图和使用的危险因素包括兴奋剂规范和态度,补充使用,身体不满和不适。兴奋剂意图和使用的保护因素包括自我效能感和积极的道德。
结论:这项研究确定了兴奋剂意图和使用的几个保护和风险因素,这些因素可能是反兴奋剂计划的可行干预目标。保护因素与无意掺杂呈负相关;然而,经验量是有限的,无法得出坚定的结论。
OBJECTIVE: To conduct a meta-analytic review of psychosocial predictors of doping intention, doping use and inadvertent doping in sport and exercise settings.
METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS: Scopus, Medline, Embase, PsychINFO, CINAHL Plus, ProQuest Dissertations/Theses and Open Grey.
METHODS: Studies (of any design) that measured the outcome variables of doping intention, doping use and/or inadvertent doping and at least one psychosocial determinant of those three variables.
RESULTS: We included studies from 25 experiments (N=13 586) and 186 observational samples (N=3 09 130). Experimental groups reported lower doping intentions (g=-0.21, 95% CI (-0.31 to -0.12)) and doping use (g=-0.08, 95% CI (-0.14 to -0.03), but not inadvertent doping (g=-0.70, 95% CI (-1.95 to 0.55)), relative to comparators. For observational studies, protective factors were inversely associated with doping intentions (z=-0.28, 95% CI -0.31 to -0.24), doping use (z=-0.09, 95% CI -0.13 to to -0.05) and inadvertent doping (z=-0.19, 95% CI -0.32 to -0.06). Risk factors were positively associated with doping intentions (z=0.29, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.32) and use (z=0.17, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.19), but not inadvertent doping (z=0.08, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.22). Risk factors for both doping intentions and use included prodoping norms and attitudes, supplement use, body dissatisfaction and ill-being. Protective factors for both doping intentions and use included self-efficacy and positive morality.
CONCLUSIONS: This study identified several protective and risk factors for doping intention and use that may be viable intervention targets for antidoping programmes. Protective factors were negatively associated with inadvertent doping; however, the empirical volume is limited to draw firm conclusions.