Applying a systems thinking lens to anti-doping: A systematic review identifying the contributory factors to doping in sport

Figures & data

Table 1. Keywords, initial search results, and search results following automated and manual duplicate removal for each database searched.

Database	Initial search results	Search results following duplicate removal
PubMed	595	478
Scopus	508	484
SportDiscus	3656	3222
Web of Science	2142	1634
Total	6901	5818

Figure 1. An example of Rasmussen’s Risk Management Framework (RMF) in anti-doping in the Australian team sport context (adapted from McLean et al., 2023).

Figure 2. PRISMA 2020 study selection flowchart.

Figure 3. The geographical origin for the participants of the included studies with the colour gradient reflecting the count of the included studies (range 1–12 studies).

Figure 4. Relationships between actors mapped onto an adapted version of Rasmussen’s Risk Management Framework (RMF) ActorMap. Lines connecting two nodes represents a described relationship between the contributory factors and numbers overlaid onto the line represent the number of studies to describe the relationship.

Figure 5. Identified contributory factors mapped onto an adapted version of Rasmussen’s Risk Management Framework (RMF) AcciMap. See Supplementary Table 2 for expanded details on these factors.

McLean, S., Naughton, M., Kerhervé, H., & Salmon, P. M. (2023). From anti-doping-I to anti-doping-II: Toward a paradigm shift for doping prevention in sport. International Journal of Drug Policy, 115, 104019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2023.104019

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar