Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Table 1.

Athlete groups and demographic information based on self-reports and hair analysis.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Self-reported use of nutritional supplements and doping in comparison to prevalence of Stanozolol/EPO use based on detection in hair in the sample by gender (presented as frequencies).

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Groups by self-declared doping behaviour (means, SDs and test statistics for main effects).

More »

Table 3 Expand

Figure 1.

Implicit doping associations by user groups.

‘Persons’ in the middle represents 100% of the sample with persons in green representing clean athletes (n = 61); blue depicts self-reported doping (n = 11); pink shows the proportion of athletes who denied doping use (n = 10), hence would be classified as non-user according to self-reports. Panels are: (A) latency measure on the doping BIAT task by self-reported user groups; (B) D scores of the doping BIAT task by self reported user groups; (C) latency measure on the doping BIAT task based on hair analysis; (D) D scores of the doping BIAT task by self reported user groups. Circles in panels A and C represents outliers.

More »

Figure 1 Expand

Table 4.

Means, SD and test statistics in the hair analysis doping behaviour scenario.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Table 5.

Interaction between measured variables (mean, minimum and maximum, respectively).

More »

Table 5 Expand

Table 6.

Doping related opinion by user groups (% is the proportion within the respective group, rounded to the closest full number).

More »

Table 6 Expand