↓ Skip to main content

Role of Intensive Training in the Growth and Maturation of Artistic Gymnasts

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine, June 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
14 news outlets
twitter
14 X users
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
118 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
439 Mendeley
Title
Role of Intensive Training in the Growth and Maturation of Artistic Gymnasts
Published in
Sports Medicine, June 2013
DOI 10.1007/s40279-013-0058-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert M. Malina, Adam D. G. Baxter-Jones, Neil Armstrong, Gaston P. Beunen, Dennis Caine, Robin M. Daly, Richard D. Lewis, Alan D. Rogol, Keith Russell

Abstract

Short stature and later maturation of youth artistic gymnasts are often attributed to the effects of intensive training from a young age. Given limitations of available data, inadequate specification of training, failure to consider other factors affecting growth and maturation, and failure to address epidemiological criteria for causality, it has not been possible thus far to establish cause-effect relationships between training and the growth and maturation of young artistic gymnasts. In response to this ongoing debate, the Scientific Commission of the International Gymnastics Federation (FIG) convened a committee to review the current literature and address four questions: (1) Is there a negative effect of training on attained adult stature? (2) Is there a negative effect of training on growth of body segments? (3) Does training attenuate pubertal growth and maturation, specifically, the rate of growth and/or the timing and tempo of maturation? (4) Does training negatively influence the endocrine system, specifically hormones related to growth and pubertal maturation? The basic information for the review was derived from the active involvement of committee members in research on normal variation and clinical aspects of growth and maturation, and on the growth and maturation of artistic gymnasts and other youth athletes. The committee was thus thoroughly familiar with the literature on growth and maturation in general and of gymnasts and young athletes. Relevant data were more available for females than males. Youth who persisted in the sport were a highly select sample, who tended to be shorter for chronological age but who had appropriate weight-for-height. Data for secondary sex characteristics, skeletal age and age at peak height velocity indicated later maturation, but the maturity status of gymnasts overlapped the normal range of variability observed in the general population. Gymnasts as a group demonstrated a pattern of growth and maturation similar to that observed among short-, normal-, late-maturing individuals who were not athletes. Evidence for endocrine changes in gymnasts was inadequate for inferences relative to potential training effects. Allowing for noted limitations, the following conclusions were deemed acceptable: (1) Adult height or near adult height of female and male artistic gymnasts is not compromised by intensive gymnastics training. (2) Gymnastics training does not appear to attenuate growth of upper (sitting height) or lower (legs) body segment lengths. (3) Gymnastics training does not appear to attenuate pubertal growth and maturation, neither rate of growth nor the timing and tempo of the growth spurt. (4) Available data are inadequate to address the issue of intensive gymnastics training and alterations within the endocrine system.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 439 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 4 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 430 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 80 18%
Student > Master 73 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 8%
Other 24 5%
Researcher 24 5%
Other 92 21%
Unknown 111 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 159 36%
Medicine and Dentistry 63 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 29 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 3%
Social Sciences 11 3%
Other 37 8%
Unknown 128 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 129. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 November 2023.
All research outputs
#312,489
of 24,844,992 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#301
of 2,869 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,058
of 202,476 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#6
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,844,992 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,869 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 55.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 202,476 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.