ReviewFrontiers in sports and active living2026
From violation to stigma: a literature review of athletes' lived experiences following anti-doping sanctions.
Review in Frontiers in sports and active living, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Charting the Scientific Landscape of Indirect Estimation Models in Doping Prevalence Research: A Bibliometric Analysis with Narrative Appraisal.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- The Effect of Educational Intervention on Legal Anti-Doping Knowledge and Doping Tendency in Elite Athletes.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Exploring the perceptions of athletes and DCOs on the remote sampling procedure in anti-doping testing: shifting control to burden.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Article
- 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite its protective intent, the anti-doping system functions in a complex, high-stakes environment where strict liability and public scrutiny can produce unintended harms for sanctioned athletes. To date, limited insights exist into the lived experiences of individuals sanctioned for Anti-Doping Rule Violations (ADRVs) under the World Anti-Doping Code. We located twelve English-language outputs published between 2011 and 2025 containing relevant empirical data, and used descriptive and bibliometric techniques, narrative synthesis, and citational analysis to evaluate the composition, impact, and practical relevance of this emerging body of work. Through narrative synthesis, we identified five key areas of concern: (1) psychological and emotional distress; (2) social isolation and reputational damage; (3) perceived procedural injustice and institutional abandonment; (4) disruption to career and athletic identity; and (5) a sense of resolution or clarity despite adversity. Difficulty in reaching and recruiting participants was noted in most studies. Highly cited articles were referenced across diverse domains, often due to their dual focus on doping motivations and firsthand experiences with ADRV sanctions. The direct translation of existing research into anti-doping policy remains limited. Gaps in reporting standards, the underrepresentation of female athletes, and regional imbalances in the evidence base constrain a comprehensive understanding of the personal consequences of ADRV sanctions. Despite these early limitations, this review marks a critical step toward evaluating the legitimacy of anti-doping rule enforcement from the perspective of those most directly affected. The findings highlight the urgent need for future research to inform more humane, equitable, and athlete-centred regulatory practices.
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.