↓ Skip to main content

The Urine Marker Test: An Alternative Approach to Supervised Urine Collection for Doping Control

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 Mendeley
Title
The Urine Marker Test: An Alternative Approach to Supervised Urine Collection for Doping Control
Published in
Sports Medicine, September 2015
DOI 10.1007/s40279-015-0388-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anne-Marie Elbe, Stine Nylansted Jensen, Peter Elsborg, Monika Wetzke, Getachew A. Woldemariam, Bernd Huppertz, Ruprecht Keller, Anthony W. Butch

Abstract

Urine sample collection for doping control tests is a key component of the World Anti-Doping Agency's fight against doping in sport. However, a substantial number of athletes experience difficulty when having to urinate under supervision. Furthermore, it cannot always be ensured that athletes are actually delivering their own urine. A method that can be used to alleviate the negative impact of a supervised urination procedure and which can also identify urine as coming from a specific athlete is the urine marker test. Monodisperse low molecular weight polyethylene glycols (PEGs) are given orally prior to urination. Urine samples can be traced to the donor by analysis of the PEGs previously given. The objective of this study was to investigate the use of the urine marker during urine doping control testing. Two studies investigated athletes' acceptance of this new method via two questionnaires (n = 253). Furthermore, a third study (n = 91) investigated whether ingestion of the marker can identify the urine as coming from a specific person and whether the marker interferes with the detection of prohibited substances. The results indicate that this new method finds wide acceptance both from athletes who have only heard about the procedure and those who have actually tested the new method. Furthermore, the marker, which can identify urine as coming from a specific person, does not interfere with the detection of prohibited substances.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 4%
Unknown 26 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 33%
Other 3 11%
Researcher 3 11%
Student > Postgraduate 2 7%
Student > Master 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 6 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 6 22%
Chemistry 3 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 7%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 8 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 December 2015.
All research outputs
#6,108,465
of 22,829,683 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#1,921
of 2,705 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,572
of 274,379 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#39
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,683 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,705 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 50.9. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 274,379 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.