ArticleFrontiers in sports and active living2025
The impact of sample retention and further analysis on doping behavior and detection: evidence from agent-based simulations.
Article in Frontiers in sports and active living, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Annual Banned-Substance Review 18th Edition-Analytical Approaches in Human Sports Drug Testing 2024/2025.Drug testing and analysis · 2026Review
- When they don't come around: how athletes and DCOs perceive the legitimacy of a remote sampling system in anti-doping testing.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Despite extensive testing efforts in anti-doping work, a persistent gap remains between low doping detection rates and substantially higher estimated doping prevalence in sports. Sample Retention and Further Analysis (SFA), which allows samples to be stored for up to ten years for future testing, offers a potential strategy to close this gap by increasing both detection and deterrence of doping. Methods: This study employs an agent-based modeling approach to simulate interactions among key stakeholders: athletes, anti-doping organizations, laboratories, and event organizers. The model captures athlete decision-making regarding doping, influenced by perceived sanction certainty and swiftness. SFA parameters, such as number of stored samples and duration of storage, were systematically varied to assess their impact. Results: Simulations show that increasing both the quantity of stored/retested samples and the storage duration reduces doping prevalence. A combined approach yields the strongest effect, with higher detection rates and lower doping behavior. However, regression analysis reveals diminishing returns at higher implementation levels, suggesting a non-linear effect. Discussion: The findings provide quantitative evidence that SFA enhances not only detection capacity but also deterrence by increasing the perceived long-term risk of sanctions. Effective SFA implementation requires strategic calibration to optimize impact. These results underscore the potential of SFA as a key component in anti-doping strategies and call for empirical validation and integration of additional behavioral factors in future research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.