Basketball talent identification: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the anthropometric, physiological and physical performance factors

Background: The purpose of this study was to do a systematic review and meta-analysis about the anthropometric, physiological, and physical performance that discriminate the physical talent in basketball.

Methods: The search was conducted using the most relevant databases as Web of Science, PubMed, SPORTDiscus and Scopus, according to the PRISMA (2020) guideline. Keywords such as “basketball”, “talented identification”, “anthropometric”, “physiology” and “physical performance” were used for the search, in English and following the “PICOS” question model. Eighteen articles' overall methodological quality was assessed using the Critical Review Forms.

Results: The study found in basketball, height, body mass, Yo-Yo test, T-test, 20 m sprint, and jump performance had statistical significance between elite and non-elite groups, including different positions and levels.

Conclusions: The reviewed literature highlighted a complicated relationship between anthropometric, physiological, and physical performance. Based on the results of the study, it's possible that height, body mass, agility, speed, endurance capacity, and lower lamb power could affect the early development of basketball.

1. Introduction

Talent identification (TID) and development (TDE) are essential factors for elite sports' success (1, 2). The formalisation and standardisation of TID and TDE are highlighted in the research conducted by Christian and Lars (3), which also confirms the influence of multiple factors on talent development. Similarly, researchers have emphasised the significance of TID in the transition of athletes from the primary level to the elite level, as it helps them maintain a high level of performance and improves the athlete's overall environment (4, 5). Recent years have seen the development of structured TID and TDE programmes for several sports in which success is dependent on anthropometric, physiological, and motor skill attributes (6–8).

The phenomenological approach divides talents into raw materials and the culmination of their development. On the one hand, it refers to natural abilities that are innate, untrained, and spontaneous (aptitudes or talents) (9). On the other hand, early TID contributes to the success of athletes at the youth stage (10). Although a large sample of athletes demonstrated that the majority of children who were identified and supported early did not become elite athletes as adults (11), the majority of children who were identified and supported early did not become elite athletes as adults. It is impossible to ignore the effect of the athlete's developmental process on the athlete's catalysts (9). Individual talent development is commonly regarded as a business (12). Thus, a gifted individual is chosen for long-term development and nurturing (11). The Model of Giftedness and Talent (MDGT) includes an athlete's talent, physical performance, raw form, and acquired effort (4). Simultaneously, the biological context of talent identification suggests that anthropometrics, physiology, and physical performance are the most intuitive manifestations of what scouts look for in players (13) and are the most visible means of measuring the basis for the emergence of recruitment and selection programmes for the search, identification, and development of talent; physical fitness and physical ability determine, on the one hand, the factors necessary for an athlete to perform at a high level (14).

Basketball is a sport characterised by intermittent, high-intensity play, and optimal performance is achieved through a complex combination of technical and tactical skills (14), requiring players to perform a variety of intense defensive and offensive actions (sprinting, shuffling, jumping, etc.) and includes analysis of many physical and physiological attributes such as (height, weight, size, body proportions, aerobic capacity, strength, anaerobic capacity, agility, and speed) (14, 15). Height and body mass are essential for improving physical performance (16). Due to the layout of the basketball court, players of different heights occupy different positions, with shorter players moving the ball quickly around the court and larger, stronger, and higher players using their height and weight close to the basket to make effective shots (15, 17). Indeed, the anthropometric profile of an athlete is a significant predictor of his or her ability to compete at the highest level of his or her chosen sport (18).

Constant environmental and situational changes are a distinguishing feature of team sports (19–21) and athletic talent components are typically comparable across team sports. Moreover, physical fitness and physical performance are essential factors in determining basketball success (7). In addition to athletic expertise, the performance of players depends on a combination of physical, functional, and behavioural characteristics (22). On the one hand, the physical characteristics of players with different skill levels fluctuate (19). Conversely, basketball players may not need to excel in any particular area, but the vast majority are competent in all areas, especially those with higher skill levels who are faster, more agile, and perform better in vertical jump tests (23–25). In the studies that have been conducted on basketball selection, including anthropometric measurements and athletic and physiological performance of basketball players, there has been a consensus on how the different factors affect the selection process. This is true even though the different factors are affected by maturity, and more research needs to be done on the validity of the different aspects of selection that are tier one indicators.

Based on the above considerations, the purpose of this research was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of anthropometric, physiological, and physical performance measures that best discriminate physical talent in basketball.

2. Materials and methods

2.1. Search strategy

This systematic review of the available literature was conducted according to the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines (26).

Compiling scientific studies were carried out through an exhaustive and systematic search in three electronic databases: the Web of Science Core Collection, PubMed, SPORTDiscus and Scopus. The search terms used were grouped into four search strings: (1) “basketball” OR “basketballs” OR “basketballers” AND (2) “talent” OR “talents” OR “talented” AND (3) “identification” OR “identifications” AND (4) “anthropometric” OR “anthropometrical” OR “anthropometrically” OR “anthropometrics” AND (5) “physiologies” OR “physiology” AND (6) “physical performance” OR “performance” OR “physical functional performance”. The search process (Figure 1) was carried out in March 2020 and June 2022. The electronic search was supplemented by manually searching the reference lists for articles. A total of 12,780 articles from the database were searched using keywords. Duplicate and irrelevant articles were deleted. After reviewing the titles and abstracts, 79 records were eliminated, and through a comprehensive evaluation, eighteen quantitative articles were left.

FIGURE 1

Figure 1. Flow diagram displaying the search's work flow.

2.2. Inclusion and exclusion criteria

To carry out this review, after the search for the articles, the study authors, titles, and dates of publication were recorded and the articles were sorted to eliminate duplicates. From the list of unique entries, the titles of each publication were examined to determine if they were written in English and consisted of a comprehensive peer-reviewed journal study. According to the PICOS question model, the inclusion criteria were: (1) population: players over the age of U12 years; (2) intervention: local/regional, gender, and athletic level; (3) comparison: association between individual and/or collective competition performance and player's fundamental movement skill, physiological parameters, and anthropometric parameters; (4) results: according to two specific indicators: level (individual and/or collective) and environment (different countries); and (5) study design: no specific limitations were set for study design.

Other examined developmental or behavioural results were excluded (e.g., RAE, maturation, psychological parameter, leadership), Disability campaign (e. Wheelchair players), Correlation of data (Standard error) etc. Excluded studies were published in the format of editorials, letters to the editor, comments, abstracts, conferences, or opinion articles.

2.3. Data collection and extraction

The review topics are related to the identification of basketball talent in various nations, taking into account comparisons between elite and non-elite basketball players and the age of the participants.

2.4. Quality of the studies

The organization of all article titles, authors, years, and source titles was explored in an Excel file. Two researchers independently conducted the search and screened the titles, abstracts, and full texts of the papers. The overall methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the McMaster's Critical Review Form: Quantitative studies (27). These studies were assessed to determine whether they included the following 16 items: objective (item 1), relevance of background literature (item 2), appropriateness of the study design (item 3), sample included (items 4 and 5), informed consent procedure (item 6), outcome measures (item 7), validity of measures (item 8), intervention (item 9), significance of results (item 10), analysis (item 11), clinical importance (item 12), description of drop outs (item 13), conclusion (item 14), practical implications (item 15), and limitations (item 16). Each of the articles' outcomes per item was designated as “1” (meets criteria) or “0” (does not meet the criteria fully).

Table 1 shows the study quality rating assessments: eighteen quantitative research articles. Eleven articles were deemed “very good” and seven articles were deemed “good.”

TABLE 1

Table 1. The overall methodological quality for quantitative studies.

2.5. Description of data correlation and variability

To avoid using correlated data extracted from each study, Pearson's correlation analysis was performed on eight variables: height, body mass, Vo2 max, yo-yo test, T-test, squat jump (SJ), countermovement jump (CMJ), and 20-meter sprint. The means were analysed for variability using one-way ANOVAs.

The analyses were conducted using version 25.0 of the statistical software IBM SPSS for Windows (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). Height, body mass, CMJ, and 20 m sprint correlation coefficients and the T-test were statistically significant with age; SJ was statistically significant with 20 m sprint correlation coefficients and one-way ANOVAs.

Different levels of correlation analysis confirmed that height and weight are significantly correlated with player position, with the exception of SJ, which was not correlated. SPSS was used to compare the correlations of various data. Due to excessive tables and data, different levels of data are subjected to a separate SPSS Pearson test at different locations, and the data results are then summarised in Excel to produce Tables 2, 3.

TABLE 2

Table 2. Description of the correlation of variable data.

TABLE 3

Table 3. Description of data variability.

2.6. Meta-analysis

Initial screening revealed that these variables were mentioned often enough to warrant a meta-analysis. Analysis based on correlation. To reduce error, data with correlations and differences between groups were included in the meta-analysis. Cochrane Collaboration's Review Manager 5.4.1, an open-source programme, was used to conduct the meta-analysis. For each study, the mean and standard deviation (SD) for each variable were used to figure out the 95% confidence interval (CI). In addition, meta-analyses with the same continuous outcome variable, unit of measurement, and meta-analyses with different units were conducted using the standardised mean difference (SMD). In each meta-analysis, the statistical significance of each study was determined using the inverse variance method, and either the random effects model (heterogeneity, I² > 50%, P < 0.05) or the fixed effects model (heterogeneity, I²> 50%, P 0.05) was used to analyse the data (37). The only piece of information provided by confidence intervals is the standard deviation of the average timing.

In contrast, prediction intervals can predict the range of future samples by accounting for the variance between studies (the intervals are equal when T² = I² = 0). I² was reported as heterogeneity between studies, reflecting the overlap between the CIs of several studies (37). I², which is calculated as follows:

$I^2=[\mathrm{Q}-(\mathrm{k}-1)]/\mathrm{Q}\times 100\mathrm{\%}$

Q is the chi-squared value of the heterogeneity test X² and k is the number of studies included in the meta-analysis. The Q statistic is the standardised weighted sum of squares of variance across studies, with lower P-values (typically around 0.010) indicating the presence of heterogeneity. The Q statistic usually has high statistical power when the number of included studies is large. The I² statistic is the proportion of observed between-study variance due to true heterogeneity rather than that observed by chance. Since all values of I² are taken as 0 when I² is negative, I² is taken between 0% and 100%. 0% I² means that no heterogeneity is observed, and larger values indicate greater heterogeneity. The threshold for determining statistical significance of a mean difference was set at P < 0.05 (38). To determine whether the degree of similarity between the observed mean differences was statistically significant, the Q statistic was calculated. The Q statistic was then converted into a standard measure of homogeneity (I² statistic) and used to evaluate the sample's level of heterogeneity. All performance variables included in the meta-analysis were subjected to sensitivity analyses to examine the robustness of the magnitude and direction of the performance effects of frequently mentioned variables. The sensitivity analyses were conducted by repeating the meta-analysis with the exclusion of studies with smaller sample sizes or unexpected results (39).

One of the articles used the mean and standard error, and the article was excluded to avoid bias (23, 40). Eighteen articles were eventually considered for inclusion in the review and meta-analysis. The main reason for the omission of an article was that it focused only on anthropomorphic characteristics and not on age or motor performance. Articles containing data from separate subgroups (age, level) were entered separately into the meta-analysis if they met the inclusion criteria. As these were natural basketball conditions, all data from studies with multiple condition/age points were used in the meta-analysis. Multiple condition/age points were combined into a single estimate for each study as these data were not independent and would have led to an overestimation of the precision of the meta-analysis.

3. Results

There are eighteen articles listed in Table 4, and 74% (n = 13) of the studies examined male only samples. Only 16% (n = 3) of the studies examined a female-only sample, while the remaining 10% (n = 2) used male and female participants. The only sport represented was basketball. Few studies have been conducted on basketball. Most studies looked at how a player's body size, physiology, physical performance, and performance affect his or her talent and competitiveness in basketball Table 4. The Summary of Anthropometric, Physiological, and Physical Performance Factors in Team Sports principal test and results.

TABLE 4

Table 4. The summary of anthropometric, physiological, and physical performance factors in team sports principal test and results.

3.1. Anthropometric

The total samples (n = 11; including male and female samples of varying ages). In height and body mass, due to the different data (mean and SD) in the article, this study compared the heterogeneity of height and body mass of basketball players in the article based on different levels, as shown in Figures 2, 3 (Hedges g (MD) = 6.04, 3.81; 95% CI [2.68 to 9.40], [0.28 to7.33]; P < 0.00001, P = 0.005). The total test for overall effect as an effect test result Z = 3.53, P = 0.0004 < 0.05; Z = 2.12, P = 0.03 < 0.05 indicate that the data pertaining to the mobilisation of basketball players of different age groups combined are statistically significant, irrespective of the height and body mass of players at different levels.

FIGURE 2

Figure 2. The youth players’ height meta-analysis.

FIGURE 3

Figure 3. The youth players’ body mass meta-analysis.

3.2. Physiology

Figures 4, 5 for the forest plot of Vo2 max and the Yo-Yo test meta-analysis, respectively. No low-level group was available for the excluded data. The overall heterogeneity of samples (n = 2, n = 8) was moderately high (I² = 66%, I² = 78%). The overall mean was estimated to be 1.09 milliseconds ahead of the total [95% CI: (−1.98 to 3.15)ms] and 128.4 milliseconds ahead of the total [95% CI: (44.91 to 211.89) ms]. In basketball, there is no statistical difference in the overall effect of the Vo2 max test (Z = 1.03, P = 0.30 > 0.05), whereas there is a statistical difference in the test for overall effect of the Yo-Yo test (Z = 3.01, P = 0.003 < 0.05).

FIGURE 4

Figure 4. The youth player Vo2max meta-analysis.

FIGURE 5

Figure 5. The youth player Yo-Yo test meta-analysis.

3.3. Physical performance

Figures 6, 7 (T-test and 20 m sprint) represent the outcomes of the identical analysis conducted on each variable for the elite and non-elite groups. Forest plots for the T-test and 20-m meta-analysis are depicted in the figures. In addition, the overall heterogeneity of the samples (n = 3, n = 8) was relatively high (I² = 0%, I² = 82%). The overall mean was estimated to be −0.80 milliseconds before the total [95% CI: (−0.97 to −0.63) milliseconds] and −0.14 milliseconds before the total [95% CI: (−0.24 to −0.05) ms]. In basketball, there is a statistically significant difference (Z = 9.09, P < 0.00001; Z = 2.97, P = 0.003 < 0.05) in the test for the overall effect of the T test and 20-meter sprint between the elite and non-elite groups.

FIGURE 6

Figure 6. The youth player T-test meta-analysis.

FIGURE 7

Figure 7. The youth player 20 m meta-analysis.

Figures 8, 9 depict the statistical and forest plots of the CMJ and SJ meta-analyses separately for each age group. The heterogeneity of samples (n = 9, n = 3) was relatively high (I² = 34%, I² = 0%). The overall mean was estimated to be 1.53 ms before the total [95% CI: (0.24 to 2,83) ms] and 1.76 ms prior to the total [95% CI: (0.25 to 3.27) ms]. The test for overall effect indicated (Z = 2.32, P = 0.02 < 0.05; Z = 2.29, P = 0.02 < 0.05) that the heterogeneity of total samples was significant in both the CMJ and SJ data analyses. Therefore, there is a statistical difference in the performance of basketball players on the CMJ and SJ tests.

FIGURE 8

Figure 8. The youth player CMJ meta-analysis.

FIGURE 9

Figure 9. The youth player SJ meta-analysis.

4. Discussion

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to identify factors of anthropometric, physiological and physical performance factors in the selection of basketball. The significance of anthropometric characteristics and physical performance in identifying basketball players was confirmed by the research. However, unlike previous studies, Vo2max did not represent the number of factors associated with athlete selection in the meta-analysis, and both metrics (Yo-Yo test and Vo2max) included the aerobic and anaerobic capacity of the athletes; however, additional confirmation is required. By comparing commonly measured statistics (such as body composition, physical performance, and physiological parameters), no athletes were excluded from the analysis of this study.

4.1. Anthropometric

In this review, some articles (n = 7) show height and body mass differ in elite and non-elite players. For instance, basketball players are always selected at a young age based on their height and larger body size (25, 36, 47). Studies on elite teams, such as the NBA, indicate that height and weight vary as players ascend the rungs, with height and weight being significant factors in shooting and passing (14, 15, 17). Moreover, the selection process for youth basketball tends to apply to all playing positions, and coaches tend to select athletes who fit an elite basketball profile characterised by a tall stature (35).

Overall height and body mass are among the most intuitive and effective ways to identify athletes in basketball (15). Earlier research suggested that coaches would select athletes based on competition and overlook the possibility of many athletes becoming elites in the future (48). Through meta-analysis, this paper demonstrates that there is no overall heterogeneity in height and body mass across levels, age, and gender, and that height and body mass are statistically significant across both athletic level and positional differences.

4.2. Physiology

Based on the characteristics of basketball, aerobic and anaerobic capacity can be seen as a distinguishing characteristic in the selection of basketball players, particularly the Vo2 max and Yo-Yo tests, which are useful in team sports and are important in screening articles to measure the aerobic and anaerobic capacity of basketball players. Improve anaerobic exercise recovery during a game, for example, by repeating short sprints or high intensity acceleration recovery intervals and preparing players to maintain an appropriate training load (29, 42). Through meta-analysis, the present study determined that the results of using the yo-yo IR1 to differentiate aerobic performance between elite, sub-elite, and non-athletic groups were consistent with the findings of Vernillo et al. (42). This study also revealed that the best young basketball players possessed superior aerobic fitness (41). In addition, the Yo-Yo test has been validated as a basketball test because its physiological demands are comparable to those of the game. Consequently, training with a Yo-Yo can affect the anaerobic energy system, which is crucial for team sports such as basketball (29).

Aerobic endurance and anaerobic capacity performance varied by competitive level, with elite athletes performing better (49–52). Anaerobic capacity is related to changes in peak height velocity and body size (53). Basketball is a high-speed running sport in which anaerobic capacity and aerobic capacity can impact player performance (54). When played on the same court, basketball necessitates a great deal of space and positional changes (28, 29, 41). At this point, the Yo-Yo test demonstrates the aerobic capacity by highlighting the body's ability to rapidly change intensity and accelerate over short distances (29). And again, aerobic and anaerobic capacity were significantly associated with assists and interceptions (35). Nevertheless, their maximum oxygen uptake is strongly influenced by genetics (55), developmental stage, and age group stratification, and the effect of age on their basic physical fitness may be overlooked during early selection. Consider the fact that the meta-analysis of Vo2max in basketball players presented in this article is not statistical (34); it was determined in this study that maximal oxygen uptake did not influence selection. In Groky's study, it was determined that among the predictors, U13 has a poorer endurance result, and that pubertal development influences endurance (14, 23). In Pojskic's research, it was determined that aerobic capacity is not a factor in basketball shooting (43). This result was likely the result of the homogeneity of the aerobic power, which reduced the variance and correlation between this conditioning capacity and the shooting performance. Due to the nonlinear nature of aerobic and anaerobic capacities, special care must be taken when selecting based on index values obtained prior to puberty.

4.3. Physical performance

According to the characteristics of basketball, the importance of agility in team sports could be explained by the frequent occurrence of situations requiring multiple, rapid direction changes in a small court (30, 35). Recent research has also highlighted agility as an essential attribute for youth team sports (30, 56). For instance, U14 basketball players on higher-ranked teams have demonstrated greater agility than those on lower-ranked teams (56). It appears that the T-test is better suited for differentiating between players of various competitive levels and training backgrounds. Therefore, it should be considered as a possible method for comparing and selecting the best athletes (24, 34, 41). In light of the fact that the T-test is the most traditional of the literature screenings and employs a literature perspective, it is essential not to overlook the importance of the agility test in selecting basketball players. And, based on this paper's meta-analysis, its characteristics are significant in younger age groups.

Concerning speed and jump performance evaluations, it has been shown that elite athletes perform better than their peers on speed and lower limb power tests (28). SJ, CMJ are a significant factor when evaluating an athlete's lower limb strength, particularly in basketball, according to the majority of the literature included in the meta-analysis. For the Caps to win the game, exceptional jumping ability in shooting and passing may also be crucial (24, 28, 33, 41). Its ability to leap not only reflects the muscular strength of its lower limbs, but also plays a vital role in its explosive power. Although its performance on the field requires a combination of physical qualities, the selection of fundamental physical qualities is essential for the long-term development (50, 51). According to the study (50, 57) the elite players also performed better on the shuttle run, variable-distance sprinting, and dribbling tests. And this study revealed that jumping is statistically significant for both elite and non-elite athletes, making it an unavoidable factor in early selection and the gradual development of speed qualities.

It is reported that athletes who are able to jump higher could have an advantage over their adversaries during offensive game actions (47). For instance, basketball players should jump as high and fast as possible to find better opportunities to shoot (47, 58). Superior dynamic vertical jump qualities may allow players to positively engage in aerial ball contests (i.e., when the ball is kicked to a group of players) during gameplay (59). Probably, the selection of players more prone to competing at the highest levels of human performance (i.e., Olympic team athletes) relies more on physical traits directly associated with the majority of tasks performed throughout the games (22). Overall, in long-term development, this can reflect the sports conditions. Even though using a single measurement can lead to mistakes in judgment, the multidimensional combination of physical changes, necessary athletic skills, congenital conditions, and learned sports factors is better for long-term development.

5. Limitation

As noted above, the variables considered omitted perceptual-cognitive, tactical, and psychological characteristics. These data were not included because research on youth players’ perceptual-cognitive skills is quite limited and generally laboratory-based (52, 60). These factors are not easy to consider in TID in many countries, especially in terms of the overall development of athletes.

Furthermore, in this study, basketball is considered a physically demanding sport in which strength and power play an important role. As physical maturity is associated with muscular strength, endurance, and speed and is important to achieve successful performance, relatively older athletes may be preferred over younger ones (61). The fact that even relatively young athletes can compete at a senior level, i.e., the effect of RAE on the long-term development of athletes, was not taken into account in this study and needs to be further investigated. In addition to this, maturity has a significant influence on height, weight, and athletic performance in the selection of athletes at the youth level (62, 63), the results resulting from the influence of maturity on athletes were excluded from the data selection in this article. This study shows significant differences between elite and non-elite athletes in functional ability and sport-specific skills comparing multiple countries using a standard method (52, 63). Both maturity and psychological factors must be analysed in more profound research in the next studies.

6. Conclusions

The reviewed literature highlighted a complicated relationship between anthropometric, physiological, and physical performance. Based on the results of the study, it is possible that height, body mass, agility, speed, endurance capacity, and lower body power could affect the early development of basketball. Particularly in the early stages of basketball development, certain factors can influence a young player's ability to learn basketball and excel in the game. Children who are taller and more physically developed may initially have an advantage due to their ability to reach the basket and cover more area on the court. Although children's physical abilities may not be fully developed, early exposure to activities that build endurance and lower body strength can set the stage for better performance in the future. Activities that promote cardiovascular fitness and muscle strength contribute to athletic performance. Agility and speed are skills that can be developed from an early age through a variety of exercises and drills. Early development of these skills can give players an advantage in manoeuvring on the court, defending, and executing offensive plays. For young players, early development in basketball involves a combination of talent and skill acquisition. Although certain physical attributes may provide an initial advantage, skill development, practise, and instruction are critical to maximising potential.

7. Practical applications

The review highlights the complex relationship between anthropometry, physiology, and physical performance when identifying talent among basketball players and the implications for early identification of athletes. Coaches and scouts select athletes while also considering how the athlete will perform in the game.

In the meta-analysis, Vo2max did not represent the number of factors associated with athlete selection, and both metrics (yo-yo test and Vo2max) included aerobic and anaerobic capacity; further confirmation is needed to determine whether it is affected by RAE as well as maturity (the role of athlete strength and power in the game).

The results of this study suggest that height, weight, yo-yo test, T test, 20 m sprint, and jumping scores are statistically significant between elite and non-elite groups in the talent selection of youth basketball players, that early athlete identification can be achieved through objectively measurable factors, and that the long-term development of athletes should be considered in a more multifaceted manner. As well as the need to consider the fairness of athletes' participation in the youth federation rules and championship rules, factors such as athletes' physical measurements can be appropriately added to the participation registration.

Data availability statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/Supplementary Material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Author contributions

MH: Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft. MG: Writing – review & editing, Methodology, Supervision. AC: Supervision, Writing – review & editing. JC: Supervision, Writing – review & editing.

Funding

The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to express their gratitude to all those who helped during the writing of this article.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.

Publisher's note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

References

1. Abbott A, Collins D. A theoretical and empirical analysis of a'state of the art'talent identification model. High Abil Stud. (2002) 13(2):157–78. doi: 10.1080/1359813022000048798

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

2. Vaeyens R, Lenoir M, Williams AM, Philippaerts RM. Talent identification and development programmes in sport. Sports Med. (2008) 38(9):703–14. doi: 10.2165/00007256-200838090-00001

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

3. Bjørndal CT, Ronglan LT. Engaging with uncertainty in athlete development–orchestrating talent development through incremental leadership. Sport Educ Soc. (2021) 26(1):104–16. doi: 10.1080/13573322.2019.1695198

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

4. Baker J, Cobley S, Schorer J. Talent identification and development in sport: international perspectives. Int J Sports Sci Coach. (2012) 7(1):177–80. doi: 10.1260/1747-9541.7.1.177

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

5. Bonal J, Jiménez SL, Lorenzo A. The talent development pathway for elite basketball players in China. Int J Environ Res Public Health. (2020) 17(14):5110. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17145110

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

6. Aalberg RR, Sæther SA. The talent development environment in a Norwegian top-level football club. Sport Sci Rev. (2016) 25(3–4):159. doi: 10.1515/ssr-2016-0009

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

7. Hoare DG, Warr CR. Talent identification and women's soccer: an Australian experience. J Sports Sci. (2000) 18(9):751–8. doi: 10.1080/02640410050120122

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

8. Joseph J, McIntyre F, Joyce C, Scanlan A, Cripps A. A comparison of multidimensional qualities discriminant of selection in elite adolescent Australian basketball athletes. PLoS One. (2021) 16(8):e0256032. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0256032

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

9. Tranckle P, Cushion CJ. Rethinking giftedness and talent in sport. Quest. (2006) 58(2):265–82. doi: 10.1080/00336297.2006.10491883

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

10. Gonçalves CE, Rama LM, Figueiredo AB. Talent identification and specialization in sport: an overview of some unanswered questions. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. (2012) 7(4):390–3. doi: 10.1123/ijspp.7.4.390

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

11. Jiménez IP, Pain MT. Relative age effect in Spanish association football: its extent and implications for wasted potential. J Sports Sci. (2008) 26(10):995–1003. doi: 10.1080/02640410801910285

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

12. Bjørndal CT, Ronglan LT, Andersen SS. The diversity of developmental paths among youth athletes: a 3-year longitudinal study of Norwegian handball players. Talent Dev Exc. (2016) 8(2):20–32.

Google Scholar

13. Reeves MJ, Roberts SJ. A bioecological perspective on talent identification in junior-elite soccer: a Pan-European perspective. J Sports Sci. (2020) 38(11-12):1259–68. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2019.1702282

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

14. Gryko K, Adamczyk JG, Kopiczko A, Calvo JL, Calvo AL, Mikołajec K. Does predicted age at peak height velocity explain physical performance in U13–15 basketball female players? BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. (2022) 14(1):1–13. doi: 10.1186/s13102-022-00414-4

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

15. Kelly AL, Jiménez Sáiz SL, Lorenzo Calvo A, de la Rubia A, Jackson DT, Jeffreys MA, et al. Relative age effects in basketball: exploring the selection into and successful transition out of a national talent pathway. Sports. (2021) 9(7):101. doi: 10.3390/sports9070101

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

16. García-Gil M, Torres-Unda J, Esain I, Duñabeitia I, Gil SM, Gil J, et al. Anthropometric parameters, age, and agility as performance predictors in elite female basketball players. J Strength Cond Res. (2018) 32:1723–30. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002043

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

17. Zhang S, Lorenzo A, Gómez M-A, Mateus N, Gonçalves B, Sampaio J. Clustering performances in the NBA according to players’ anthropometric attributes and playing experience. J Sports Sci. (2018) 36(22):2511–20. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2018.1466493

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

18. Baker J, Schorer J, Wattie N. Compromising talent: issues in identifying and selecting talent in sport. Quest. (2018) 70(1):48–63. doi: 10.1080/00336297.2017.1333438

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

19. Csáki I, Géczi G, Kassay L, Déri D, Révész L, Dávid Z, et al. The new system of the talent development program in Hungarian soccer. Biomed Hum Kinet. (2014) 6:1. doi: 10.2478/bhk-2014-0014

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

20. Gorostiaga E, Granados C, Ibanez J, Izquierdo M. Differences in physical fitness and throwing velocity among elite and amateur male handball players. Int J Sports Med. (2005) 26(03):225–32. doi: 10.1055/s-2004-820974

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

21. Loturco I, Jeffreys I, Kobal R, Abad CCC, Ramirez-Campillo R, Zanetti V, et al. Acceleration and speed performance of Brazilian elite soccer players of different age-categories. J Hum Kinet. (2018) 64(1):205–18. doi: 10.1515/hukin-2017-0195

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

22. Nikolaidis PT, Ingebrigtsen J. Physical and physiological characteristics of elite male handball players from teams with a different ranking. J Hum Kinet. (2013) 38(1):115–24. doi: 10.2478/hukin-2013-0051

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

23. Gryko K. Effect of maturity timing on the physical performance of male Polish basketball players aged 13 to 15 years. Sci Rep. (2021) 11(1):22019. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-01401-4

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

24. Rinaldo N, Toselli S, Gualdi-Russo E, Zedda N, Zaccagni L. Effects of anthropometric growth and basketball experience on physical performance in pre-adolescent male players. Int J Environ Res Public Health. (2020) 17(7):2196. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17072196

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

25. Torres-Unda J, Zarrazquin I, Gil J, Ruiz F, Irazusta A, Kortajarena M, et al. Anthropometric, physiological and maturational characteristics in selected elite and non-elite male adolescent basketball players. J Sports Sci. (2013) 31(2):196–203. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2012.725133

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

26. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Syst Rev. (2021) 10(1):1–11. doi: 10.1186/s13643-020-01552-x

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

27. Law M, Stewart D, Pollock N, Letts L, Bosch J, Westmorland M. Guidelines for critical review form—quantitative studies 1998. McMaster University Occupational Therapy Evidence-based Practice Research Group. (2003).

28. Arede J, Esteves P, Ferreira AP, Sampaio J, Leite N. Jump higher, run faster: effects of diversified sport participation on talent identification and selection in youth basketball. J Sports Sci. (2019) 37(19):2220–7. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2019.1626114

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

29. Attene G, Pizzolato F, Calcagno G, Ibba G, Pinna M, Salernitano G, et al. Sprint vs. intermittent training in young female basketball players. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. (2014) 54(2):154–61.24509986

PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar

30. Fort-Vanmeerhaeghe A, Montalvo A, Latinjak A, Unnithan V. Physical characteristics of elite adolescent female basketball players and their relationship to match performance. J Hum Kinet. (2016) 53(1):167–78. doi: 10.1515/hukin-2016-0020

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

31. Gryko K, Kopiczko A, Mikołajec K, Stasny P, Musalek M. Anthropometric variables and somatotype of young and professional male basketball players. Sports. (2018) 6(1):9. doi: 10.3390/sports6010009

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

32. Masanovic B, Popovic S, Bjelica D. Comparative study of anthropometric measurement and body composition between basketball players from different competitive levels: elite and sub-elite. Pedagog Psychol Med Biological Prob Phys Train Sports. (2019) 23(4):176–81. doi: 10.15561/18189172.2019.0403

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

33. Nikolaidis P, Calleja-González J, Padulo J. The effect of age on positional differences in anthropometry, body composition, physique and anaerobic power of elite basketball players. Sport Sci Health. (2014) 10(3):225–33. doi: 10.1007/s11332-014-0198-5

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

34. Ramos SA, Massuça LM, Volossovitch A, Ferreira AP, Fragoso I. Morphological and fitness attributes of young male Portuguese basketball players: normative values according to chronological age and years from peak height velocity. Front Sports Act Living. (2021) 3:130. doi: 10.3389/fspor.2021.629453

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

35. Ramos S, Volossovitch A, Ferreira AP, Fragoso I, Massuça L. Differences in maturity, morphological and physical attributes between players selected to the primary and secondary teams of a Portuguese Basketball elite academy. J Sports Sci. (2019) 37(15):1681–9. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2019.1585410

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

36. te Wierike SCM, Elferink-Gemser MT, Tromp EJY, Vaeyens R, Visscher C. Role of maturity timing in selection procedures and in the specialisation of playing positions in youth basketball. J Sports Sci. (2015) 33(4):337–45. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2014.942684

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

37. Borenstein M, Cooper H, Hedges L, Valentine J. Effect sizes for continuous data. The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis, vol.2. New York: Russell Sage Foundation (2009). p. 221–35.

38. Hopkins W, Marshall S, Batterham A, Hanin J. Progressive statistics for studies in sports medicine and exercise science. Med Sci Sports Exerc. (2009) 41(1):3. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e31818cb278

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

39. Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, Jüni P, Moher D, Oxman AD, et al. The cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. Br Med J. (2011) 343. doi: 10.1136/bmj.d5928

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

40. Kadlec D, Sainani KL, Nimphius S. With great power comes great responsibility: common errors in meta-analyses and meta-regressions in strength & conditioning research. Sports Med. (2022) 53(2):313–25. doi: 10.1007/s40279-022-01766-0

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

41. Guimarães E, Baxter-Jones A, Maia J, Fonseca P, Santos A, Santos E, et al. The roles of growth, maturation, physical fitness, and technical skills on selection for a Portuguese under-14 years Basketball team. Sports. (2019) 7(3):61. doi: 10.3390/sports7030061

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

42. Vernillo G, Silvestri A, La Torre A. The yo-yo intermittent recovery test in junior basketball players according to performance level and age group. J Strength Cond Res. (2012) 26(9):2490–4. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e31823f2878

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

43. Pojskic H, Sisic N, Separovic V, Sekulic D. Association between conditioning capacities and shooting performance in professional basketball players: an analysis of stationary and dynamic shooting skills. J Strength Cond Res. (2018) 32(7):1981–92. doi: 10.1519/jsc.0000000000002100

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

44. Bouteraa I, Negra Y, Shephard RJ, Chelly MS. Effects of combined balance and plyometric training on athletic performance in female basketball players. J Strength Cond Res. (2020) 34(7):1967–73. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002546

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

45. Pino-Ortega J, Rojas-Valverde D, Gómez-Carmona CD, Rico-González M. Training design, performance analysis, and talent identification—A systematic review about the most relevant variables through the principal component analysis in Soccer, Basketball, and Rugby. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. (2021) 18(5):2642. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18052642

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

46. Ivanović J, Kukić F, Greco G, Koropanovski N, Jakovljević S, Dopsaj M. Specific physical ability prediction in youth Basketball players according to playing position. Int J Environ Res Public Health. (2022) 19:2. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19020977

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

47. Nikolaidis PT, Asadi A, Santos EJ, Calleja-González J, Padulo J, Chtourou H, et al. Relationship of body mass status with running and jumping performances in young basketball players. Muscles Ligaments Tendons J. (2015) 5(3):187–94. doi: 10.11138/mltj/2015.5.3.187

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

48. Baker J, Cobley S, Schorer J, Wattie N, editors. Routledge handbook of talent identification and development in sport. London and New York: Taylor & Francis (2017).

49. Gabbett T, Kelly J, Ralph S, Driscoll D. Physiological and anthropometric characteristics of junior elite and sub-elite rugby league players, with special reference to starters and non-starters. J Sci Med Sport. (2009) 12(1):215–22. doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2007.06.008

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

50. Matthys SP, Vaeyens R, Vandendriessche J, Vandorpe B, Pion J, Coutts AJ, et al. A multidisciplinary identification model for youth handball. Eur J Sport Sci. (2011) 11(5):355–63. doi: 10.1080/17461391.2010.523850

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

51. Moss SL, McWhannell N, Michalsik LB, Twist C. Anthropometric and physical performance characteristics of top-elite, elite and non-elite youth female team handball players. J Sports Sci. (2015) 33(17):1780–9. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2015.1012099

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

52. Vaeyens R, Malina RM, Janssens M, Van Renterghem B, Bourgois J, Vrijens J, et al. A multidisciplinary selection model for youth soccer: the Ghent youth soccer project. Br J Sports Med. (2006) 40(11):928–34. doi: 10.1136/bjsm.2006.029652

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

53. Carvalho HM, Coelho-e-Silva MJ, Gonçalves CE, Philippaerts RM, Castagna C, Malina RM. Age-related variation of anaerobic power after controlling for size and maturation in adolescent basketball players. Ann Hum Biol. (2011) 38(6):721–7. doi: 10.3109/03014460.2011.613852

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

54. Dellal A, Varliette C, Owen A, Chirico EN, Pialoux V. Small-sided games versus interval training in amateur soccer players: effects on the aerobic capacity and the ability to perform intermittent exercises with changes of direction. J Strength Cond Res. (2012) 26(10):2712–20. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e31824294c4

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

55. Pollock RD, Carter S, Velloso CP, Duggal NA, Lord JM, Lazarus NR, et al. An investigation into the relationship between age and physiological function in highly active older adults. J Physiol. (2015) 593(3):657–80. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.2014.282863

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

56. Ramos S, Volossovitch A, Ferreira AP, Barrigas C, Fragoso I, Massuça L. Differences in maturity, morphological, and fitness attributes between the better-and lower-ranked male and female u-14 Portuguese elite regional basketball teams. J Strength Cond Res. (2020) 34(3):878–87. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002691

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

57. Mohamed H, Vaeyens R, Matthys S, Multael M, Lefevre J, Lenoir M, et al. Anthropometric and performance measures for the development of a talent detection and identification model in youth handball. J Sports Sci. (2009) 27(3):257–66. doi: 10.1080/02640410802482417

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

58. Karcher C, Buchheit M. On-court demands of elite handball, with special reference to playing positions. Sports Med. (2014) 44(6):797–814. doi: 10.1007/s40279-014-0164-z

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

59. Woods CT, Raynor AJ, Bruce L, McDonald Z, Collier N. Predicting playing status in junior Australian Football using physical and anthropometric parameters. J Sci Med Sport. (2015) 18(2):225–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2014.02.006

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

60. Williams AM, Reilly T. Talent identification and development in soccer. J Sports Sci. (2000) 18(9):657–67. doi: 10.1080/02640410050120041

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

61. Lupo C, Boccia G, Ungureanu AN, Frati R, Marocco R, Brustio PR. The beginning of senior career in team sport is affected by relative age effect. Front Psychol. (2019) 10:1465.31293489

PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar

62. Coelho e Silva MJ, Figueiredo AJ, Moreira Carvalho H, Malina RM. Functional capacities and sport-specific skills of 14-to 15-year-old male basketball players: size and maturity effects. Eur J Sport Sci. (2008) 8(5):277–85. doi: 10.1080/17461390802117177

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

63. Pearson D, Naughton GA, Torode M. Predictability of physiological testing and the role of maturation in talent identification for adolescent team sports. J Sci Med Sport. (2006) 9(4):277–87. doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2006.05.020

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar