Peer-reviewed article
Growth and Maturation Assessment in Youth Sport: Balancing Benefits and Risks.
Lundberg TR, Parry GN, Cumming SP ·
Summary
Written by AI, not yet AICS's view · claude-haiku-4-5-20251001This peer-reviewed narrative review examines growth and maturation assessment in youth sport, addressing debates about whether measuring young athletes' physical characteristics could harm their body image or contribute to eating disorders. The authors argue that appropriately implemented assessment can prevent injuries, enable personalized training, and promote fair talent identification, while risks arise not from measurement itself but from how results are communicated and the coaching environment. The review proposes five principles for safe implementation: educating stakeholders, protecting privacy, ensuring voluntary participation, using trained professionals, and integrating assessment into holistic athlete monitoring.
Key points
- Growth and maturation assessment helps identify athletes at risk of growth-related and overuse injuries
- Assessment enables individualized training aligned with biological rather than chronological age
- Appropriately implemented assessment promotes inclusive talent identification and reduces bias against late-maturing athletes
- Risks of body image disturbance are associated with communication and coaching environment, not measurement itself
- Five implementation principles are proposed to maximize benefits and minimize risks
Limitations
This is a narrative review of existing evidence rather than primary research, so it does not provide new empirical data on outcomes. The document does not specify which countries' youth sport systems are covered or provide quantitative evidence comparing different assessment approaches.
Abstract
The assessment and monitoring of growth and maturation (G&M) in youth sport has become increasingly debated, with some medical advisory boards expressing concerns that weighing young athletes may contribute to body image disturbances and eating disorders. In some instances, these concerns have prompted recommendations against anthropometric assessment in youth sport. This narrative review examines the evidence for and against G&M assessment in youth sport, evaluating the benefits of appropriately implemented assessment against the potential risks. G&M assessment supports injury prevention by identifying athletes undergoing rapid growth who are at increased risk of growth-related and overuse injuries. It enables individualized training by aligning programing with biological rather than chronological age, and promotes inclusive talent identification by counteracting maturity-related selection biases that systematically exclude late-maturing athletes. While concerns about body image and eating disorders are valid, the reviewed evidence suggests that the risks are not associated with the collection of anthropometric measurements itself, but rather with how information is communicated and the broader sociocultural and coaching environments in which athletes train. Five G&M implementation principles are proposed to maximize benefits and minimize risks: stakeholder education, privacy protection, voluntary participation, assessment by trained professionals, and integration within a holistic and child-centered athlete monitoring system. Based on the evidence reviewed, G&M assessment conducted within appropriate ethical and professional frameworks can support athlete welfare, development, and equitable participation.