The Prevalence of Match-Fixing Among Athletes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

This paper presents a systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of match-fixing among athletes, preregistered in OSF (GWDM2). Searches were conducted on Web of Science, ProQuest, PubMed, PsycInfo, and Google Scholar. Inclusion criteria were studies that reported the prevalence of match-fixing, including participants where at least 60% are athletes and presenting original data. Five dimensions of match-fixing were coded: 1) own participation, 2) being approached, 3) knowledge of others’ participation, 4) knowledge of others being approached, and 5) participation in contests that had been fixed. In all, 16 studies, covering 13,517 participants, were included. Risk of bias was evaluated by the Hoy et al. (2012) checklist. The following pooled prevalence rates were found: own participation in match-fixing 7.3% (95% CI = 6.3–8.3%), approached for match-fixing 6.2% (95% CI = 3.5–10.5%), knowledge of others participation 7.7% (95% CI = 2.4–22.1%), knowledge of others being approached 16.9% (95% CI = 16.0–17.8%), and participating in contests that had been fixed 6.5% (95% CI = 1.9–19.5%). Most included studies had a moderate risk of bias, typically due to factors such as selection bias, non-randomized sampling, and non-validated instruments. The results indicate that match-fixing is not rare among athletes.