Fife Niall Timothy, Shaw Alex Lauren, Stebbings Georgina Kate, Chollier Marie, Joseph Cox Luke Thomas, Harvey Andy Neil, Williams Alun Gwen, Heffernan Shane Micheal
Faculty of Science and Engineering, Applied Sports Science Technology and Medicine Research Centre (A-STEM), Swansea University, Swansea, UK.
Manchester Metropolitan Institute of Sport, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK.
Eur J Sport Sci. 2025 May;25(5):e12300. doi: 10.1002/ejsc.12300.
There have been limited studies allowing key stakeholders the opportunity to voice their opinions on DSD athlete participation in elite sport. The purpose of this study was to survey athletes eligible to compete in the female category regarding DSD athletes' inclusion. This study surveyed national, elite and world class athletes (n = 147) competing in the female category regarding their opinions on the eligibility of DSD athletes in elite sport. The study compared current and retired Olympic sport athletes, elite versus world class athletes and current Olympic sport versus current Olympic-recognised sport athletes. Most athletes believed that it was an unethical requirement to medicate in order to comply with eligibility regulations (67.2%). Overall, athletes did not support a separate category for DSD athletes, an opinion most strongly held for precision sports (69.5%) and a majority believed their participation in the female category was fair (54.4%, precision sports). This opinion was more commonly held by Olympic-recognised sport than current Olympic sport athletes, particularly for sports heavily reliant on physical capacity (61.1% vs. 20%). More current Olympic sport athletes believed that the eligibility of DSD athletes for the female category was unfair, compared to Olympic-recognised sport athletes. Athletes agreed that sports federations could be doing more to make sport more inclusive for DSD athletes (82.2%), with only 8.2% believing such athletes were treated fairly. After reviewing these novel results, the athletes' voice (in combination with scientific evidence) should be utilised to create appropriate policies that align with the collective values of athletes.
允许关键利益相关者就双性发育异常(DSD)运动员参与精英体育发表意见的研究有限。本研究的目的是对有资格参加女子组比赛的运动员进行调查,了解他们对DSD运动员参赛资格的看法。本研究调查了参加女子组比赛的国家、精英和世界级运动员(n = 147),了解他们对DSD运动员参加精英体育资格的看法。该研究比较了现役和退役的奥运会项目运动员、精英运动员与世界级运动员,以及现役奥运会项目运动员与现役奥运会认可项目运动员。大多数运动员认为,为了符合参赛资格规定而进行药物治疗是不道德的要求(67.2%)。总体而言,运动员不支持为DSD运动员设立单独的组别,这种观点在精度类运动中最为强烈(69.5%),并且大多数人认为他们参加女子组比赛是公平的(54.4%,精度类运动)。与现役奥运会项目运动员相比,奥运会认可项目的运动员更普遍持有这种观点,尤其是在严重依赖身体能力的运动项目中(61.1%对20%)。与奥运会认可项目的运动员相比,更多现役奥运会项目运动员认为DSD运动员参加女子组比赛的资格是不公平的。运动员们一致认为,体育联合会可以做更多工作,使体育对DSD运动员更具包容性(82.2%),只有8.2%的人认为这些运动员得到了公平对待。在审视这些新颖的结果后,应利用运动员的声音(结合科学证据)来制定符合运动员集体价值观的适当政策。