Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24744482›Full record

ReviewBiology of sport2013

Genes in sport and doping.

A Pokrywka, P Kaliszewski, E Majorczyk, A Zembroń-Łacny

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biology of sport, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Angiogenic Doping: Plausible Yet Difficult to Detect.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

A PokrywkaInstitute of Sport, Warsaw, Poland.
P KaliszewskiInstitute of Sport, Warsaw, Poland.
E MajorczykUniversity of Technology, Opole, Poland.
A Zembroń-ŁacnyUniversity of Zielona Góra, Poland.
Instytut Sportu · PLOpole University of Technology · PLUniversity of Zielona Góra · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genes control biological processes such as muscle production of energy, mitochondria biogenesis, bone formation, erythropoiesis, angiogenesis, vasodilation, neurogenesis, etc. DNA profiling for athletes reveals genetic variations that may be associated with endurance ability, muscle performance and power exercise, tendon susceptibility to injuries and psychological aptitude. Already, over 200 genes relating to physical performance have been identified by several research groups. Athletes' genotyping is developing as a tool for the formulation of personalized training and nutritional programmes to optimize sport training as well as for the prediction of exercise-related injuries. On the other hand, development of molecular technology and gene therapy creates a risk of non-therapeutic use of cells, genes and genetic elements to improve athletic performance. Therefore, the World Anti-Doping Agency decided to include prohibition of gene doping within their World Anti-Doping Code in 2003. In this review article, we will provide a current overview of genes for use in athletes' genotyping and gene doping possibilities, including their development and detection techniques.

Indexed as

emotionsendurancegene dopinggene polymorphismmuscle forcemuscle masstendon injury

Identifiers

PMID24744482
PMCPMC3944571
OpenAlexW2081093353

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.