Runacres · Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) 2021 · systematic review and meta-analysis · n=24 studies in meta-analysis (44 in systematic review, 165,000 athletes)

Health Consequences of an Elite Sporting Career: Long-Term Detriment or Long-Term Gain? A Meta-Analysis of 165,000 Former Athletes.

Cited 73 times in the scientific literature.

Level 3 - non-randomized controlled study

Systematic review and meta-analysis of non-randomized observational cohort studies

PubMed 33368029 · doi:10.1007/s40279-020-01379-5 · record verified 2026-08-26

What was done

Authors conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of English-language studies published after 1970 from Web of Science, PubMed, and SportDiscus. Across 38,047 retrieved records, 44 were included in the systematic review and 24 in the meta-analysis, representing approximately 165,000 former elite athletes. Athletes were categorized by discipline: endurance, mixed/team, or power. Standardized mortality ratios (SMR) and standardized proportionate mortality ratios (SPMR) were pooled to compare athlete mortality against general population rates.

What was found

Athletes showed lower all-cause mortality compared to the general population: male SMR was 0.69 (95% CI 0.61–0.78; p < 0.01) and female SMR was 0.51 (95% CI 0.40–0.65; p < 0.01). Male power athletes showed no survival benefit (SMR 1.04, 95% CI 0.91–1.12). Male athletes overall had lower cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality (SMR 0.73, 95% CI 0.62–0.85) and cancer mortality (SMR 0.75, 95% CI 0.63–0.89). However, male power athletes had no CVD mortality reduction (SMR 1.10, 95% CI 0.86–1.40), and endurance athletes showed a non-significant reduction in cancer mortality (SMR 0.73, 95% CI 0.50–1.07). There were insufficient data to calculate sport-specific SMRs in females.

Why it matters

These findings argue against a J-shaped curve where elite athletic training shortens lifespan, showing an overall survival advantage that nevertheless varies by sport classification.

Limits

All included evidence is observational and uses general-population comparators, leaving open confounding from baseline health advantages, socioeconomic status, and post-career lifestyle. Data were insufficient to analyze female sport-specific outcomes, and the abstract provides no control for performance-enhancing substance use or training volume variations.

Cited by