Growth and Maturation Assessment in Youth Sport: Balancing Benefits and Risks

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.