Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24149415›Full record

ReviewJournal of sports science & medicine2007

Advances in paediatric strength assessment: changing our perspective on strength development.

Mark De Ste Croix

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of sports science & medicine, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Physical Persistency across Game Quarters and during Consecutive Games in Elite Junior Basketball Players.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. How Young is "Too Young" to Start Training?ACSM's health & fitness journal · 2013
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Mark De Ste CroixUniversity of Gloucestershire , Gloucester, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Our knowledge of the age and sex associated changes in strength during childhood and adolescence is relatively limited compared to other physiological parameters. However, those studies available on the age and sex associated change in strength are relatively consistent, especially for the lower limbs. Caution must be taken when transferring this knowledge to other muscle joints as the development in strength appears to be both muscle action and joint specific. Strength appears to increase in both boys and girls until about the age of 14 y where it begins to plateau in girls and a spurt is evident in boys. By 18 y there are few overlaps in strength between boys and girls. The exact age in which sex differences become apparent appears to be both muscle group and muscle action specific and there is a suggestion that sex differences in upper body strength occur earlier than lower body strength. What is less clear is the complex factors that contribute to the production of strength during childhood and adolescence. There are few well controlled longitudinal studies that have concurrently examined the influence of known variables using appropriate statistical techniques. Most studies have shown that maturation does not exert an independent effect when other factors, such as stature and body mass are accounted for. Also, the assumption that muscle cross-sectional area is the most important parameter in strength production does not hold when examined with other known variables. Consistently, stature appears to play a key role in strength development and this may be attributed to the strength spurt that has been linked to peak height velocity, and the muscle moment arm. Advances in technology have provided us with more accurate techniques to examine these explanatory variables but the complex interaction of neural, mechanical and muscular remains to be clearly identified from well controlled longitudinal studies. Key pointsThe age associated development in strength is attributable to changes in growth and maturation. Sex differences appear at around 14y and very few girls out perform boys in strength tests at 18y.Stature and mass appear to be important explanatory variables in the development of muscle strength. PHV is a particularly important time for maximal gains in strength during childhood.The muscle moment arm is possibly the most important factor in the development of muscle strength with age but further longitudinal studies using MRI are needed.

Indexed as

childrenmuscle sizeStrengthtechnology

Identifiers

PMID24149415
PMCPMC3787279

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.