| Title |
The abuse of diuretics as performance‐enhancing drugs and masking agents in sport doping: pharmacology, toxicology and analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
British Journal of Pharmacology, August 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1476-5381.2010.00789.x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Amy B Cadwallader, Xavier De La Torre, Alessandra Tieri, Francesco Botrè |
| Abstract |
Diuretics are drugs that increase the rate of urine flow and sodium excretion to adjust the volume and composition of body fluids. There are several major categories of this drug class and the compounds vary greatly in structure, physicochemical properties, effects on urinary composition and renal haemodynamics, and site and mechanism of action. Diuretics are often abused by athletes to excrete water for rapid weight loss and to mask the presence of other banned substances. Because of their abuse by athletes, diuretics have been included on The World Anti-Doping Agency's (WADA) list of prohibited substances; the use of diuretics is banned both in competition and out of competition and diuretics are routinely screened for by anti-doping laboratories. This review provides an overview of the pharmacology and toxicology of diuretics and discusses their application in sports. The most common analytical strategies currently followed by the anti-doping laboratories accredited by the WADA are discussed along with the challenges laboratories face for the analysis of this diverse class of drugs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 176 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 41 | 23% |
| United Kingdom | 14 | 8% |
| South Africa | 6 | 3% |
| Ecuador | 6 | 3% |
| Canada | 5 | 3% |
| Poland | 3 | 2% |
| Spain | 3 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 3 | 2% |
| Dominican Republic | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 27 | 15% |
| Unknown | 66 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 144 | 82% |
| Scientists | 18 | 10% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 8 | 5% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 6 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 321 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 315 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 69 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 43 | 13% |
| Researcher | 27 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 25 | 8% |
| Other | 16 | 5% |
| Other | 39 | 12% |
| Unknown | 102 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 47 | 15% |
| Sports and Recreations | 36 | 11% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 33 | 10% |
| Chemistry | 22 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 16 | 5% |
| Other | 57 | 18% |
| Unknown | 110 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 230. 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 15 September 2023.
All research outputs
#169,083
of 25,770,491 outputs
Outputs from British Journal of Pharmacology
#28
of 7,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#383
of 105,146 outputs
Outputs of similar age from British Journal of Pharmacology
#1
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,770,491 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,986 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
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 105,146 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.