research paper on sports medicine

British Journal of Sports Medicine

(BJSM) is the leading, peer-reviewed journal in sports medicine, with additional multimedia resources.

Impact Factor: 11.6 Citescore: 27.1 All metrics >>

British Journal of Sports Medicine (BJSM) is a Plan S compliant Transformative Journal .

British Journal of Sports Medicine (BJSM) is a multimedia portal for authoritative original research, systematic reviews, consensus statements and debate in sport and exercise medicine (SEM). We define sport and exercise medicine broadly. BJSM’s web, print, video and audio material serves the international sport and exercise medicine community which includes 25 clinical societies who have over 13,000 members. You can access BJSM on Facebook , Twitter , Instagram and Youtube as well as via our podcasts , Stitcher and blog.

BMJ Open Sport and Exercise Medicine is a companion journal to the British Journal of Sports Medicine

Meet the new Editors! For more information, please visit the landing page>>

BMJ and BJSM are fully committed to ensure best practice in publication ethics. Please see our joint statement for further information >>

News: The Faculty and BASEM are continuing to progress with the reformation of the new college. The next phase of this process involves the implementation of a new steering group, with the first step to appoint an independent chair. Please see here to find out about the role >>

Topical Issues

a female athlete teeing off in a golf competition

A collection of key resources, providing an overview of the current medical issues and research landscape in #GolfMedicine

a focus on the latest multidisciplinary research in hip and groin pathology

A global SEM team tackles some of sport’s toughest topics: Abuse, Racism, Ableism, Sexism, and Transphobia

“Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus” – answering the call for an increased focus on female-specific SEM research

Latest Articles

Systematic review :

30 August 2024

29 August 2024

Original research :

Featured Video

Motor retraining by real-time sonic feedback: understanding strategies of low impact running (phd academy award).

To cite: Van den Berghe P. Motor retraining by real-time sonic feedback: understanding strategies of low impact running (PhD Academy Award). British Journal of Sports Medicine 2022;56:1196-1197. Read the full article here: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2022-105750 Video abstract complementing the PhD Academy Award article “Motor retraining by real-time sonic feedback: understanding strategies of low impact running”. The aims of this PhD thesis were to (1) develop, (2) to validate a wearable system for impact reduction through the use of real-time, music-based biofeedback, (3) to evaluate its effectiveness in a gait retraining context, and to gain insight into possible strategies for low impact running.

BJSM accepts submissions of a wide range of article types, including original research, education articles and systematic reviews.

The Author Information section provides specific article requirements to help you turn your research into an article suitable for BJSM.

Information is also provided on editorial policies and open access

Most Read Articles

29 September 2023

Consensus statement :

18 October 2023

6 October 2023

8 March 2024

Current Issue

31 July 2024

Editorial :

Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine

Subscribe to journal Subscribe
Get new issue alerts Get alerts

Secondary Logo

Journal logo, current issue.

September 2024 - Volume 34 - Issue 5

Editor-in-Chief: Christopher Hughes, MBBS, MSc
ISSN: 1050-642X
Online ISSN: 1536-3724
Frequency: 6 issues / year
Ranking: Orthopedics 45/136 Sport Sciences 51/127 Physiology 53/85
Impact Factor: 2.1

Featured Supplements

About this issue.

Just as the 2024 Paralympic Games are underway in Paris, we are pleased to bring you our September 2024 issue of the Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine.

Our Lead Editorial this month by Rickerby and Colleagues focuses on the common issue of the athlete's perception of pain.

Given that pain is that most common of presenting complaints, it is interesting to observe the variation in individual approaches used by clinicians when assessing their patients who present with pain as their main problem. Concepts surrounding pain presentations are varied and have evolved over time to become more broad in their nature, with many clinicians adopting a ' bio-psychosocial' multimodal model as part of their assessment strategy and management framework.

The individual athlete's response to their unique experience of pain is equally of interest. Many athletes push on through pain in order to attempt to achieve their goals, whilst others exhibit pain-avoidance behaviours in what might appear to be similar circumstances. There may be conscious, or subconscious reasons for pain-avoidance behaviours which may be in evolutionary context or maladaptive in nature.

Rickerby and Colleagues discuss the Behavioural Inhibition System (BIS)-Behavioural Activation System (BAS) model of behavioural regulation, motivation and emotion which takes into account a broad range of external modifiers of pain presentations (including, for example, the influences of coaching staff and agents as behavioural modifiers).

They discuss the relationship between this model and injury avoidance behaviours, together with proposing the future development of a data-driven approach in modifying individual BIS-BAS responses.

We are interested to hear your thoughts and reflections on this Editorial, together with your experiences of adopting objective, data-driven approaches to symptoms, in clinical practice. Letters to the Editor concerning this Editorial are welcome.

Jo and Colleagues focus on the question as to whether a pre-injury history of migraines is associated with worse acute symptoms following sports-related concussion events. In a retrospective cohort study of 1190 NCAA Division III Collegiate athletes (<=25 years of age) with sports-related concussion (SRC), 93 athletes (7.8%) reported a pre-injury history of migraine. No significant differences in total post-concussion symptom scale scores collected at 3 days post-injury were found between the athletes with a prior history of migraines and those without a pre-injury migraine history.

Uyeno and Colleagues examined the relationship between eye tracking proficiency markers and vestibular symptoms in a retrospective cohort study of 119 varsity college athletes aged 18-24 years following acute mild traumatic brain injury.

Amongst 119 athletes, 177 diagnoses of mTBI were made between 2013 and 2019. The authors found that 44% of athletes displayed abnormal eye tracking within 72 hours post-event compared with baseline assessments. They highlight the importance of eye-tracking in the diagnosis and management of mTBI and call for further research into the use of eye-tracking proficiency testing in other acute settings.

Powers and Colleagues set out to identify geographical issues related to accessing optimal concussion care for pediatric athletes with concussion , using virtual internet searches to identify local care options within various rural and metropolitan geographic regions within each State of the United States. Using their unique search strategy, significant differences in access based on rural versus metropolitan areas were found, with regional and geographic variation in optimal care provision.

The Authors concluded that an overall lack of access to multidisciplinary concussion care exists for pediatric patients, particularly in rural communities, and call for the establishment of resources to optimize concussion care based on these existing gaps in access and optimal care.

We bring you three studies relating to the topic of hamstring injuries this issue, including work by Gendron and Colleagues on flexibility and point-of-care musculoskeletal ultrasound (POCUS) measures for prognosticating return to play following a first hamstring strain injury, Talu and Colleagues who sought to determine the reliability, validity and applicability of the isolated hamstring flexibility test (IHFT) , and Boltz and Colleagues who conducted a descriptive epidemiological study of athletes involved in various NCAA sports using NCAA Injury surveillance data.

Following on from previous work examining the prevalence of female and male athlete triad risk factors amongst ultramarathon runners which was published by Høeg and Colleagues in CJSM in 2022, Roche and Colleagues present a Brief Report on Triad Prevalence and Exploratory Hormonal Biomarker Analyses in Ultramarathon Runners, with additional data collated from a 2021 cohort of runners from the Western States Endurance run 100-mile race.

In our General Review this issue, Harvey and Colleagues present a Systematic Review and Meta Analysis on the Effects of Cycle Ergometer versus Treadmill Exercise Stress Testing on QTc Interval Prolongation in Patients with Long QT syndrome.

We also bring you two interesting case reports, the first on Paget-Schroetter syndrome in a patient with posterior shoulder subluxation , and the second on a case of acute compartment Syndrome and rhabdomyolysis caused by a single electrical muscle stimulation in a 46-year-old female professional athlete with fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue syndrome, and myofascial disorder .

Don't forget to check out our CJSM social media channels for the latest CJSM content and updates from the world of primary care sports medicine including Instagram , Twitter and Facebook , and feel free to explore our CME offerings on the Lippincott CME Connection website with some free modules available for all to try, offering ACCME credits.

Finally, enjoy tuning into our podcasts with Dr Erin Hammer and guests, which are available on our website and on iTunes.

Here's hoping you enjoy our latest issue, and wishing the best of luck to all of those working hard in the summer months at the 2024 Paralympics and at all other sporting events at this time,

Best wishes,

Christopher Hughes MBBS MSc

Editor-in-Chief

Colleague's E-mail is Invalid

Your message has been successfully sent to your colleague.

Save my selection

American Journal of Sports Medicine

Sports Health: A Multidisciplinary Approach
Video Journal of Sports Medicine
Easy Reider Podcast
Corporate Partners
Partnership Opportunities
Support AOSSM
Member Login

The American Journal of Sports Medicine (AJSM) is the official peer-reviewed scientific journal of the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM). Founded in 1972, AJSM is an essential forum for independent orthopaedic sports medicine research and education, allowing clinical practitioners the ability to make decisions based on sound scientific information. AJSM is published 14 times a year and contains original articles addressed to orthopaedic surgeons, team physicians, athletic trainers, and physical therapists focusing on the treatment and prevention of athletic injuries.

AJSM has a five-year impact factor of 5.4 and is ranked number 9 out of 136 orthopaedic publications* and number 7 out of 127 sports sciences publications*, explore how the AJSM and Bruce Reider, MD, Editor-in-Chief, can expand your knowledge and keep you up-to-date with the latest research through our online content .

View AJSM’s Editorial Board here.

View the Journal

AOSSM is a trusted source among the orthopaedic sports medicine profession for knowledge, skills, and continuing education. Login now to see a complete list of what's next in orthopaedic sports medicine education.

Additional Resources

Explore how the American Journal of Sports Medicine can expand your knowledge and keep you up to date with the latest research through our online content.

Current Concepts/Journal CME

The American Journal of Sports Medicine ’s Current Concepts CME activity tests your knowledge and application of material presented in Current Concept articles. Earn one credit per article towards your Part II MOC CME requirements after completing a short online post-test and evaluation. This activity provides you with researched-based information and application of critical topics in sports medicine with the most updated information for you to reflect, evaluate, and use in your practice.

This is an easy and convenient way to get your Orthopaedic CME credits for articles that you are already reading!

Keep current with AJSM monthly podcasts. The 5-in-5 podcast is an overview of each issue, making this a great start before you dive deep into each issue. After reading an issue, listen to our in-depth podcast to learn more about authors, research and editorial commentary.

Video Abstracts

Each issue features a video abstract that summarizes a feature article.

The AJSM Webinar Series provides an opportunity for authors to discuss their work with readers with ample time set aside for Q&A. Earn up to 1 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit ™ after completing a brief post-test and evaluation.

By clicking "Accept", you agree to the storing of cookies on your device and our use to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our communication efforts. Our cookie policy is available here .

Current Opinion
Open access
Published: 26 August 2020

Muscle-strengthening Exercise Epidemiology: a New Frontier in Chronic Disease Prevention

Jason A. Bennie 1 ,
Jane Shakespear-Druery 1 &
Katrien De Cocker 1

Sports Medicine - Open volume 6 , Article number: 40 ( 2020 ) Cite this article

56k Accesses

74 Citations

239 Altmetric

Metrics details

This current opinion provides an overview of the emerging discipline of muscle-strengthening exercise epidemiology. First, we define muscle-strengthening exercise, and discuss its recent addition into the global physical activity guidelines, which were historically mainly focused on aerobic physical activity (walking, running, cycling etc.). Second, we provide an overview of the current clinical and epidemiological evidence on the associations between muscle-strengthening exercise and health, showing a reduced mortality risk, and beneficial cardiometabolic, musculoskeletal, functional and mental health-related outcomes. Third, we describe the latest epidemiological research on the assessment, prevalence, trends and correlates of muscle-strengthening exercise. An overview of recent population estimates suggests that the proportion of adults meeting the current muscle-strengthening exercise guideline (10-30%; ≥ 2 sessions/week) is far lower than adults reporting meeting the aerobic exercise guideline (~ 50%; ≥ 150 min/week). Fourth, we discuss the complexity of muscle-strengthening exercise promotion, highlighting the need for concurrent, coordinated, and multiple-level strategies to increase population-level uptake/adherence of this exercise modality. Last, we explore key research gaps and strategies that will advance the field of muscle-strengthening exercise epidemiology. Our objective is to provide a case for increased emphasis on the role of muscle-strengthening exercise for chronic disease prevention, and most importantly, stimulate more research in this currently understudied area of physical activity epidemiology.

Whilst clinical and epidemiological evidence links muscle-strengthening exercise to optimal health and well-being, over 80% of adults do not report meeting the muscle-strengthening exercise guidelines (≥ 2 times/week).

Compared to aerobic physical activity/exercise, muscle-strengthening exercise has been generally overlooked in public health approaches for chronic disease prevention.

Future research in muscle-strengthening exercise epidemiology should focus on standardising assessment instruments and assessing constructs beyond frequency (type, duration, intensity etc.); developing device-based assessments to improve measurement precision; and the inclusion of muscle-strengthening exercise into existing health surveillance systems.

Introduction

Strong clinical and emerging epidemiological evidence shows that muscle-strengthening exercise (i.e. use of weight machines/body weight exercises) is independently associated with multiple health outcomes, including a reduced risk of all-cause mortality [ 1 , 2 , 3 ], incidence of diabetes [ 4 , 5 ] and enhanced cardiometabolic [ 6 , 7 ], musculoskeletal [ 8 , 9 , 10 ] and mental health [ 11 , 12 ]. However, recent health surveillance data from multiple countries suggest only 10-30% adults meet the muscle-strengthening exercise guideline (≥ 2 sessions/week) [ 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 ]. Moreover, despite its numerous independent health benefits, in comparison to aerobic physical activity (e.g. walking, running or cycling), muscle-strengthening exercise has been largely overlooked in public health approaches for chronic disease prevention [ 14 , 17 , 19 ]. This current opinion paper:

i.Provides a narrative review of the emerging discipline of muscle-strengthening exercise epidemiology

ii.Argues the case for an increased emphasis on the role of muscle-strengthening exercise for chronic disease prevention

iii.Discusses key research gaps and strategies to advance this field

Defining Muscle-strengthening Exercise

Muscle-strengthening exercise, sometimes referred to as strength/weight/resistance training or exercise, is a voluntary activity that includes the use of weight machines, exercise bands, hand-held weights, or own body weight (e.g. push-ups or sit-ups) [ 20 ]. When performed regularly, clinical exercise studies show that muscle-strengthening exercise increases skeletal muscle strength, power, endurance and mass [ 21 ]. This exercise-related behaviour is usually performed during a person’s leisure time, commonly within community (fitness centres/gyms) or home settings [ 22 ]. An individual may engage in muscle-strengthening exercise for numerous purposes, including for strength-related sports (e.g. weight/power lifting), aesthetic purposes (e.g. body-building/sculpting); physical therapy (e.g. rehabilitation from injury); conditioning for sports performance and for general fitness and health [ 23 ].

Muscle-strengthening Exercise and Physical Activity Guidelines—a Recent Addition

Since the 1970s, physical activity recommendations for public health focused on promoting moderate-to-vigorous intensity aerobic physical activity (MVPA: e.g. walking, running or cycling) [ 24 ]. However, over the past decade, muscle-strengthening exercise has since been adopted. Muscle-strengthening exercise was initially included in the ‘2008 Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans’ [ 25 ], subsequently adopted in the World Health Organisation’s ‘2010 Global Recommendations on Physical Activity for Health’ [ 26 ] and is now included in many national public health recommendations [ 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 ]. The current global recommendations state that adults (18-64 years) should engage in:

i.At least 150 min of moderate-intensity aerobic physical activity, or at least 75 min of vigorous-intensity aerobic physical activity, or an equivalent combination of both a week

ii.Muscle-strengthening activities involving major muscle groups on 2 or more days a week [ 26 ]

Despite this inclusion, aerobic MVPA still remains the core focus of physical activity for chronic disease prevention [ 31 , 32 , 33 ]. The combination of muscle-strengthening exercise only being a recent addition into physical activity guidelines, and that it is still rarely assessed in health surveillance is likely to explain the current lack of research focus [ 16 ]. However, from a health promotion perspective, it might be possible that some may simply not ‘enjoy’ or find it difficult to engage in regular aerobic MVPA. For example, among those living in restrictive built environments lacking street connectivity, access to greenspace, and safe places to engage in common aerobic MVPA-related activities (e.g. walking, cycling and running) [ 34 , 35 ]. Moreover, this exercise modality may be effective for those that are not able to perform aerobic MVPA due to co-morbidities, such as functional limitations or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [ 36 , 37 ]. Hence, there is a need to promote alternative forms of physical activity/exercise beyond aerobic MVPA [ 36 , 37 ].

Muscle-strengthening Exercise and Health

The addition of muscle-strengthening exercise into physical activity recommendations is due to the strong scientific evidence showing that this physical activity mode has multiple and unique health benefits. Since comprehensive reviews on muscle-strengthening exercise and health outcomes are available elsewhere [ 20 , 21 , 23 , 38 ], we will only briefly discuss this evidence base.

First, the Clinical

The health benefits of muscle-strengthening exercise from a clinical perspective are well established from over 30 years of research [ 38 ]. In brief, meta-analyses of short-duration clinical exercise studies show that muscle-strengthening exercise increases skeletal muscle mass/strength [ 23 , 39 , 40 ], bone mineral density [ 9 , 41 ], the ability to perform activities of daily living [ 42 ], improves cardiometabolic health [ 6 , 43 ] and reduces symptoms of depression/anxiety [ 11 , 12 ]. In many of these meta-analyses, the benefits of muscle-strengthening exercise are independent of, or in some cases more effective than, aerobic MVPA [ 6 , 11 , 21 , 39 ]. In addition, compared to aerobic MVPA, muscle-strengthening exercise has greater effects on emerging health conditions, such as preventing/treating sarcopenia [ 10 ] and maintaining physical function [ 44 , 45 ]. This is particularly important when considering the current demographic trend of an ageing population [ 46 ], with declines in muscle mass/function projected to be amongst the key twenty-first-century public health challenges [ 10 , 44 , 45 ].

Now, the Epidemiological

A limitation of findings from clinical exercise studies, even at the meta-analytical level, is the inclusion of small and homogeneous samples [ 6 , 11 ]. From a public health perspective, it is necessary to establish how health benefits observed in controlled exercise studies translate to free-living community-dwelling adults. However, in comparison to the decades of epidemiological research on aerobic MVPA [ 38 , 47 , 48 ], similar research on muscle-strengthening exercise is limited. Nonetheless, recently epidemiological studies on the association between muscle-strengthening exercise and health have begun to emerge. A brief overview of the latest evidence now follows.

Saeidifard et al. conducted the first meta-analysis on the associations of muscle-strengthening exercise with mortality [ 1 ]. That analysis of 11 longitudinal studies (370,256 participants; mean follow-up = 8.85 years) showed that compared to no exercise, muscle-strengthening exercise was independently associated with 21% lower risk of all-cause mortality (after adjusting for aerobic MVPA, age, sex) [ 1 ]. Interestingly, a sub-analysis showed that compared to no muscle-strengthening exercise, 1-2 sessions/week was associated with reduced risk of mortality, whereas ≥ 3 sessions/week was not [ 49 ] suggesting that high doses (above the current guideline) of muscle-strengthening exercise may not necessarily be protective against morality. Since that meta-analysis, other longitudinal studies have shown that muscle-strengthening exercise is independently associated with reduced mortality risk [ 2 , 3 ]. Prospective data from the US cohort studies have also identified that compared to those doing none, muscle-strengthening exercise is independently associated with a reduced incidence of diabetes [ 4 , 5 ], cardiovascular disease [ 50 ], colon/kidney cancer [ 51 ], and gains in waist circumference [ 52 ].

Run, Lift or Both?—Emerging Epidemiological Evidence for Combining Aerobic MVPA and Muscle-strengthening Exercise

In addition to these independent health benefits, our recent epidemiological studies suggest that, compared to engaging in either the muscle-strengthening exercise guideline (≥ 2 sessions/week) or the aerobic MVPA guideline alone (≥ 150 min/week), the combination of both (as is prescribed in the current guideline) may be most beneficial for the prevention and/or management of multiple prevalent chronic health conditions [ 14 , 49 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 ]. Our cross-sectional studies, amongst large samples (range: ~ 10,000 to ~ 1.7 million adults) across several countries (e.g. the USA, Germany and South Korea) have shown that compared to meeting the aerobic MVPA or muscle-strengthening exercise guideline alone, meeting both guidelines was associated with several important indicators of health. These include a reduced prevalence of cardiometabolic (hypertension, diabetes, cardiovascular disease) and general health conditions (arthritis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma) [ 54 , 58 ]; depression/depressive symptom severity [ 53 , 56 , 57 ]; obesity [ 49 ]; and prevalence of hyperglycaemia and dyslipidaemia [ 55 ]. Given the cross-sectional nature of these data, we urge caution in drawing strong causal inferences. Nonetheless, our findings are consistent with evidence from clinical studies demonstrating that, compared to engaging in either activity alone, combining aerobic MVPA and muscle-strengthening exercise has more favourable effects on cardiometabolic biomarkers [ 59 , 60 , 61 ], gains in lean muscle mass [ 62 ] and indicators of mental health [ 63 ].

Assessment, Prevalence and Correlates of Muscle-strengthening Exercise in Health Surveillance

Whilst research on the assessment, prevalence and correlates of physical activity has historically focused on aerobic MVPA [ 31 , 32 , 33 , 64 , 65 , 66 ], over the past decade, there has been some focus on the descriptive epidemiology of muscle-strengthening exercise [ 13 , 14 , 16 ]. We provide a brief overview of the common ways muscle-strengthening exercise is assessed in health surveillance, and the latest research on its prevalence and correlates.

In health surveillance, muscle-strengthening exercise is exclusively assessed by self-report, typically assessing its frequency only (sessions/week). In contrast to aerobic MVPA, there is currently no available validated device-based assessment method, such as accelerometry, to assess muscle-strengthening exercise in large population studies. Consequently, since self-reporting assessments of physical activity are prone to issues with social desirability and/or over reporting [ 67 ], muscle-strengthening exercise prevalence estimates obtained by self-report are likely to be overestimations [ 14 ]. Nonetheless, compared to aerobic MVPA, it is likely that individuals are able to more reliably recall engagement in muscle-strengthening exercise [ 68 ]. Yore et al. (2007) compared the reliability of survey items assessing both aerobic MVPA and muscle-strengthening exercise used in the US behavioural risk factor surveillance system survey, the largest and most consistently implemented survey assessing both exercise modalities [ 68 ]. That study showed that reliability estimates for muscle-strengthening exercise (Cohen’s kappa [ k ] = 0.85), exceed those for aerobic MVPA ( k = 0.67) [ 68 ].

The available studies on public health surveillance data (sample size range: ~ 9,000 to ~ 1.7 million adults) from several countries (e.g. the USA, Australia, Finland, the UK and Germany) suggest that between 10 and 30% of adults meet the muscle-strengthening exercise guideline (≥ 2 sessions/week) [ 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 ]. Moreover, our recent paper on trends of muscle-strengthening exercise amongst US adults suggests that at the population level muscle-strengthening exercise levels were stable between 2011 and 2017 (29.1 to 30.3%) [ 69 ].

Compared to the proportions meeting the muscle-strengthening exercise guideline, the prevalence of those reporting sufficient aerobic MVPA guideline is considerably higher (~ 50%) [ 13 , 15 , 54 ]. Importantly, as shown in Fig. 1 , our data amongst ~ 1.7 million US adults indicates that almost twofold greater proportions of US adults report no muscle-strengthening exercise (57.2%), compared to no aerobic exercise (32.2%) [ 49 ]. A potential explanation for these vastly differing prevalence levels is the fact that compared to certain types of aerobic physical activity/exercise that are common in daily living (e.g. walking for transport purposes/shopping), individuals have limited opportunity to engage in unintentional/incidental muscle-strengthening exercise. Based on this comparison, we argue that when paralleled to aerobic MVPA, equal (or possibly, greater) public health emphasis should be placed on the development of strategies and large-scale interventions to support the uptake/adherence of muscle-strengthening exercise at the population level [ 16 , 54 , 56 , 57 ]. However, muscle-strengthening exercise has rarely been the focus of physical activity promotion for public health [ 19 ], and has even been referred to as the ‘forgotten’ [ 17 ] or ‘neglected’ guideline [ 70 ].

Percentages of adults (≥ 18 years; n = 1,677,108) reporting ‘No’ or ‘Sufficient’ moderate-to-vigorous intensity aerobic physical activity (MVPA: e.g. walking, running or cycling) and muscle-strengthening exercise (MSE; weight machines/body weight exercises)*. The asterisk indicates that data for this figure are drawn from pooling the 2011, 2013, 2015, and 2017 behavioural risk factor surveillance system surveys. Data available from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Data and Documentation Repository: https://www.cdc.gov/brfss/data_documentation/index.htm

At present, most research on the correlates of muscle-strengthening exercise has focused on sociodemographic and lifestyle-related factors. Studies have consistently shown that older age, being female, having low education/income and being overweight/obese are inversely independently associated with not meeting the muscle-strengthening exercise guideline [ 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 ]. Moreover, our Australian data suggest that compared to those living in metropolitan settings, those living in rural and remote regions are less likely to meet the muscle-strengthening exercise guideline [ 14 ]. A systematic review by Rhodes et al. found based on the current limited literature, intrapersonal factors such as self-efficacy, affective judgements and self-regulation, and interpersonal factors including programme leadership and subjective norms may have a key role in muscle-strengthening exercise adherence [ 71 ].

Muscle-strengthening Exercise Promotion—a Challenging Prospect

Despite being recommended by global/national public health agencies [ 26 , 27 , 29 , 38 ], muscle-strengthening exercise has been a limited focus for public health approaches in chronic disease prevention [ 17 , 19 , 54 ]. This lack of focus is likely due to the fact that muscle-strengthening exercise is a complex behaviour with multiple and unique health promotion challenges [ 16 ]. For example, optimal muscle-strengthening exercise progression requires a basic understanding of specific terminology (e.g. sets, repetitions, large-muscle groups) [ 21 ], access to basic equipment (resistance bands/barbells) [ 20 ], self-efficacy to perform muscle-strengthening exercise-related activities (squats, lunges, push-ups) [ 71 ] and the likelihood of multiple entrenched negative social norms (e.g. fear of injury/excessive muscle gain/hyper-masculine settings) [ 37 , 72 , 73 , 74 ].

To address these complicated factors, it is likely that concurrent, coordinated and multiple-level strategies are needed [ 16 ]. Some of these may include the following:

-Providing educational programmes and materials that offer basic information on muscle-strengthening exercise and its importance for health. Such educational strategies should focus on the fact that muscle-strengthening exercise does not necessarily require expensive equipment or access to specialised professionals. This approach would be particularly useful for older adults and those who are home-bound.

Increasing the availability of equipment (barbells, resistance bands etc.) to encourage muscle-strengthening exercise in multiple settings (home, workplace etc.).

Providing affordable/attractive spaces for muscle-strengthening exercise (community health clubs/centres, machines in open spaces).

Enabling affordable public access to professionals who have skills in prescribing muscle-strengthening exercise (exercise physiologists/fitness instructors/strength coaches).

Using behaviour-change science techniques to understand how different activities suit different sub-groups (e.g. older adults, culturally/linguistically diverse populations).

Providing mass media campaigns endorsing muscle-strengthening exercise as important for health, and challenging its negative stereotypes.

Moving Forward—Next Phases in Muscle-strengthening Exercise Epidemiology

Since research on the muscle-strengthening exercise epidemiology is still in its initial stages, there are multiple areas for future research. Some potential priority areas include the following:

Standardising Assessment

Amongst studies of nationally representative samples, prevalence estimates for meeting the muscle-strengthening exercise guideline ranged from ~ 10% in Australia [ 14 ] to ~ 30% in the USA [ 16 , 18 ]. Whilst this may be reflective of diverse muscle-strengthening exercise levels across countries, it is more likely that these differences are a consequence of the different surveillance instruments used across studies. Researchers should consider developing standardised muscle-strengthening exercise assessment items, as this would enhance the validity of cross-country comparisons and assist in accurately tracking/monitoring muscle-strengthening exercise levels.

Beyond Frequency

At present muscle-strengthening exercise assessment items used in public health research predominantly only assess its frequency. Since clinical exercise studies demonstrate duration, intensity and type (single vs. multi-joint; body weight vs. use of weight machines etc.) of muscle-strengthening exercise may affect outcomes such as skeletal muscle strength/size/endurance [ 23 ], items that assess these muscle-strengthening exercise participation constructs will provide a more nuanced insight into this exercise modality and its associations with health.

Device-based Assessments

As noted, a key limitation of assessment of muscle-strengthening exercise surveillance is that it is exclusively assessed by self-report. Whilst being of low cost/participant burden, self-report assessment of health behaviours is prone to issues with recall bias (e.g. social desirability and over/under reporting) [ 67 ]. Whilst currently unavailable, future studies should explore the use of wearable technologies/smart phone applications and their potential to assess muscle-strengthening exercise with greater precision.

Beyond Sociodemographic Correlates

Congruent with the expansive research on the correlates of aerobic MVPA [ 31 , 64 ], research should assess the potential for a wider range of possible influences, such as social (e.g. social norms/behavioural modelling) and physical environmental (e.g. access to facilities/equipment) factors. Moreover, future studies should examine the key barriers and facilitators amongst population sub-groups most at risk of low muscle-strengthening exercise engagement (e.g. older adults, females, those experiencing sociodemographic disadvantage).

More Surveillance

Despite being globally recommended for a decade, muscle-strengthening exercise is still rarely assessed in physical activity surveillance [ 19 ]. As with common practice for aerobic MVPA [ 32 , 33 , 66 ], there is a need for surveillance systems to provide large-scale cross-country assessments of muscle-strengthening exercise. Such information is essential for the tracking and monitoring of this important health behaviour and establishing at risk population sub-groups for low-level engagement.

This current opinion paper presents an overview of the emerging discipline of muscle-strengthening exercise epidemiology. The current scientific evidence indicates that the multiple and independent health benefits of muscle-strengthening exercise from a clinical perspective are strong, and rapidly emerging from an epidemiological standpoint. Importantly, epidemiological evidence suggests that amongst those doing none, small-to-moderate increases in muscle-strengthening exercise at the population level are likely to have considerable public health benefits. Yet, current conservative population estimates suggest that between 10-30% of adults report meeting the muscle-strengthening exercise guideline, a far lower proportion than those meeting the MVPA guideline (~ 50%). Success in large-scale interventions adherence/adherence of the muscle-strengthening exercise guideline at the population level will likely be contingent upon several multi-level and concurrent approaches. Future muscle-strengthening exercise epidemiology research should consider developing standardised muscle-strengthening exercise assessments in health surveillance (assessing constructs beyond frequency), examining a wider range of the potential correlates of muscle-strengthening exercise, and integrating assessments of muscle-strengthening exercise into existing health surveillance systems.

Availability of Data and Materials

Not applicable

Abbreviations

Moderate-to-vigorous intensity aerobic physical activity

Cohen’s kappa

Saeidifard F, Medina-Inojosa JR, West CP, Olson TP, Somers VK, Bonikowske AR, et al. The association of resistance training with mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2019;2047487319850718.

Stamatakis E, Lee IM, Bennie J, Freeston J, Hamer M, O’Donovan G, et al. Does strength-promoting exercise confer unique health benefits? A pooled analysis of data on 11 population cohorts with all-cause, cancer, and cardiovascular mortality endpoints. Am J Epidemiol. 2018;187(5):1102–12.

PubMed Google Scholar

Tarasenko YN, Linder DF, Miller EA. Muscle-strengthening and aerobic activities and mortality among 3+ year cancer survivors in the U.S. Cancer Cause Control. 2018;29(4-5):475–84.

Google Scholar

Grontved A, Pan A, Mekary RA, Stampfer M, Willett WC, Manson JE, et al. Muscle-strengthening and conditioning activities and risk of type 2 diabetes: a prospective study in two cohorts of US women. PLoS Med. 2014;11(1):e1001587.

PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Grontved A, Rimm EB, Willett WC, Andersen LB, Hu FB. A prospective study of weight training and risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus in men. Arch Intern Med. 2012;172(17):1306–12.

Ashton RE, Tew GA, Aning JJ, Gilbert SE, Lewis L, Saxton JM. Effects of short-term, medium-term and long-term resistance exercise training on cardiometabolic health outcomes in adults: systematic review with meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2018:bjsports-2017-098970.

Lemes ÍR, Ferreira PH, Linares SN, Machado AF, Pastre CM, Netto J. Resistance training reduces systolic blood pressure in metabolic syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Br J Sports Med. 2016:bjsports-2015-094715.

Schoenfeld BJ, Ogborn D, Krieger JW. Effects of resistance training frequency on measures of muscle hypertrophy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Med. 2016;46(11):1689–97.

Martyn-St James M, Carroll S. Effects of different impact exercise modalities on bone mineral density in premenopausal women: a meta-analysis. J Bone Miner Metab. 2010;28(3):251–67.

Mcleod JC, Stokes T, Phillips SM. Resistance exercise training as a primary countermeasure to age-related chronic disease. Front Physiol. 2019;10(645).

Gordon BR, McDowell CP, Hallgren M, Meyer JD, Lyons M, Herring MP. Association of efficacy of resistance exercise training with depressive symptoms: meta-analysis and meta-regression analysis of randomized clinical trials. JAMA Psychiatry. 2018;75(6):566–76.

Gordon BR, McDowell CP, Lyons M, Herring MP. The effects of resistance exercise training on anxiety: a meta-analysis and meta-regression analysis of randomized controlled trials. Sports Med. 2017:1–12.

Bennie JA, Pedisic Z, Van Uffelen JG, Banting LK, Gale J, Vergeer I, et al. The descriptive epidemiology of total physical activity, muscle-strengthening exercises and sedentary behaviour among Australian adults – results from the National Nutrition and Physical Activity Survey. BMC Public Health. 2016;16:73. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-016-2736-3 .

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Bennie JA, Pedisic Z, van Uffelen JGZ, Charity MJ, Harvey JT, Banting LK, et al. Pumping iron in Australia: prevalence, trends and sociodemographic correlates of muscle strengthening activity participation from a national sample of 195,926 adults. PLoS ONE. 2016;11(4):e0153225.

Bennie JA, Pedisic Z, Suni JH, Tokola K, Husu P, Biddle SJ, et al. Self-reported health-enhancing physical activity recommendation adherence among 64,380 Finnish adults. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2017.

Bennie JA, Lee D-C, Khan A, Wiesner GH, Bauman AE, Stamatakis E, et al. Muscle-strengthening exercise among 397,423 U.S. Adults: prevalence, correlates, and associations with health conditions. Am J Prev Med. 2018.

Strain T, Fitzsimons C, Kelly P, Mutrie N. The forgotten guidelines: cross-sectional analysis of participation in muscle strengthening and balance & co-ordination activities by adults and older adults in Scotland. BMC Public Health. 2016;16(1):1108.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Adult participation in aerobic and muscle-strengthening physical activities--United States, 2011. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2013;62(17):326–30.

Milton K, Ramirez Varela A, Foster C, Strain T, Cavill N, Mutrie N. A review of global surveillance on the muscle strengthening and balance elements of physical activity recommendations. J Frailty Sarcopenia Falls. 2018;3(2):114–24.

American College of Sports Medicine. American College of Sports Medicine position stand. Progression models in resistance training for healthy adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2009;41(3):687–708.

Garber CE, Blissmer B, Deschenes MR, Franklin BA, Lamonte MJ, Lee IM, et al. American College of Sports Medicine position stand. Quantity and quality of exercise for developing and maintaining cardiorespiratory, musculoskeletal, and neuromotor fitness in apparently healthy adults: guidance for prescribing exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011;43(7):1334–59.

Loustalot F, Carlson SA, Kruger J, Buchner DM, Fulton JE. Muscle-strengthening activities and participation among adults in the United States. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2013;84(1):30–8.

Haff GG, Triplett NT. Essentials of strength training and conditioning 4th edition: human kinetics; 2015.

Oja P, Titze S. Physical activity recommendations for public health: development and policy context. EPMA J. 2011;2(3):253–9.

U.S Department of Health and Human Services. 2008 Physical activity guidelines for Americans. Washington; 2008.

World Health Organization. Global recommendations on physical activity for health; 2010.

Australian Goverment Department of Health. Australia’s physical activity & sedentary behaviour guidelines for adults (18-64 years). Canberra: ACT; 2014.

The UKK Institute for Health Promotion. UKK Institute’s physical activity pie. Tampere: The UKK Institute for Health Promotion Research; 2016.

UK Chief Medical Officer (CMO). UK chief medical officers’ physical activity guidelines. 2019 [cited 2019 13.09]; Available from: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/829841/uk-chief-medical-officers-physical-activity-guidelines.pdf .

Federal Ministry for Health. National recommendations for physical activity and physical activity promotion. 2016 [cited 2019 12.06]; Available from: https://www.sport.fau.de/files/2015/05/National-Recommendations-for-Physical-Activity-and-Physical-Activity-Promotion.pdf .

Bauman AE, Reis RS, Sallis JF, Wells JC, Loos RJ, Martin BW. Correlates of physical activity: why are some people physically active and others not? Lancet (London, England). 2012;380(9838):258–71.

Guthold R, Stevens GA, Riley LM, Bull FC. Worldwide trends in insufficient physical activity from 2001 to 2016: a pooled analysis of 358 population-based surveys with 1·9 million participants. Lancet Glob Health. 2018.

Hallal PC, Andersen LB, Bull FC, Guthold R, Haskell W, Ekelund U. Global physical activity levels: surveillance progress, pitfalls, and prospects. Lancet (London, England). 2012;380(9838):247–57.

McCormack GR, Shiell A. In search of causality: a systematic review of the relationship between the built environment and physical activity among adults. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2011;8(1):125.

Sallis JF, Cervero RB, Ascher W, Henderson KA, Kraft MK, Kerr J. An ecological approach to creating active living communities. Annu Rev Public Health. 2006;27:297–322.

Winett RA, Carpinelli RN. Potential health-related benefits of resistance training. Prev Med. 2001;33(5):503–13.

CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Phillips SM, Winett RA. Uncomplicated resistance training and health-related outcomes: evidence for a public health mandate. Curr Sports Med Rep. 2010;9(4):208–13.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Physical activity guidelines for Americans, 2nd edition. Washington, DC; 2018.

Schoenfeld BJ, Ogborn D, Krieger JW. Dose-response relationship between weekly resistance training volume and increases in muscle mass: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Sports Sci. 2017;35(11):1073–82.

Ralston GW, Kilgore L, Wyatt FB, Baker JS. The effect of weekly set volume on strength gain: a meta-analysis. Sports Med (Auckland, NZ). 2017;47(12):2585–601.

Martyn-St James M, Carroll S. A meta-analysis of impact exercise on postmenopausal bone loss: the case for mixed loading exercise programmes. Br J Sports Med. 2009;43(12):898–908.

Mangione KK, Miller AH, Naughton IV. Cochrane review: improving physical function and performance with progressive resistance strength training in older adults. Phys Ther. 2010;90(12):1711–5.

Strasser B, Siebert U, Schobersberger W. Resistance training in the treatment of the metabolic syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of resistance training on metabolic clustering in patients with abnormal glucose metabolism. Sports Med (Auckland, NZ). 2010;40(5):397–415.

Prado CM, Purcell SA, Alish C, Pereira SL, Deutz NE, Heyland DK, et al. Implications of low muscle mass across the continuum of care: a narrative review. Ann Med. 2018;50(8):675–93.

Rizzoli R, Reginster JY, Arnal JF, Bautmans I, Beaudart C, Bischoff-Ferrari H, et al. Quality of life in sarcopenia and frailty. Calcif Tissue Int. 2013;93(2):101–20.

CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Jaul E, Barron J. Age-related diseases and clinical and public health implications for the 85 years old and over population. Front Public Health. 2017;5:335.

Lee IM, Shiroma EJ, Lobelo F, Puska P, Blair SN, Katzmarzyk PT. Effect of physical inactivity on major non-communicable diseases worldwide: an analysis of burden of disease and life expectancy. Lancet (London, England). 2012;380.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Physical activity and health: a report of the surgeon general. In: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services CfDCaP, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, editor. Atlanta, GA; 1996.

Bennie JA, De Cocker K, Pavey T, Stamatakis E, Biddle SJH, Ding D. Muscle strengthening, aerobic exercise, and obesity: a pooled analysis of 1.7 million US adults. Obesity (Silver Spring, Md). 2019.

Shiroma EJ, Cook NR, Manson JE, Moorthy MV, Buring JE, Rimm EB, et al. Strength training and the risk of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2017;49(1):40–6.

Mazzilli KM, Matthews CE, Salerno EA, Moore SC. Weight training and risk of 10 common types of cancer. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2019;51(9):1845–51.

Mekary RA, Grøntved A, Despres J-P, De Moura LP, Asgarzadeh M, Willett WC, et al. Weight training, aerobic physical activities, and long-term waist circumference change in men. Obesity. 2015;23(2):461–7.

Bennie JA, De Cocker K, Biddle SJH, Teychenne MJ. Joint and dose-dependent associations between aerobic and muscle-strengthening activity with depression: a cross-sectional study of 1.48 million adults between 2011 and 2017. Depress Anxiety. 2019.

Bennie JA, De Cocker K, Teychenne MJ, Brown WJ, Biddle SJH. The epidemiology of aerobic physical activity and muscle-strengthening activity guideline adherence among 383,928 U.S. adults. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2019;16(1):34.

Bennie JA, Ding D, Khan A, Stamatakis E, Biddle SJH, Kim J. Run, lift, or both? Associations between concurrent aerobic–muscle strengthening exercise with adverse cardiometabolic biomarkers among Korean adults. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2018;2047487318817899.

Bennie JA, Teychenne M, Tittlbach S. Muscle-strengthening exercise and depressive symptom severity among a nationally representative sample of 23,635 German adults. J Affect Disord. 2020.

Bennie JA, Teychenne MJ, De Cocker K, Biddle SJH. Associations between aerobic and muscle-strengthening exercise with depressive symptom severity among 17,839 U.S. adults. Prev Med. 2019.

Bennie JA, Lee D-C, Brellenthin AG, De Cocker K. Muscle-strengthening exercise and prevalent hypertension among 1.5 million adults: a little is better than none. J Hypertens. 2020; Publish Ahead of Print.

Bird SR, Hawley JA. Update on the effects of physical activity on insulin sensitivity in humans. BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med. 2017;2(1):e000143.

Church TS, Blair SN, Cocreham S, Johannsen N, Johnson W, Kramer K, et al. Effects of aerobic and resistance training on hemoglobin A1c levels in patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial. Jama. 2010;304(20):2253–62.

Mann S, Beedie C, Jimenez A. Differential effects of aerobic exercise, resistance training and combined exercise modalities on cholesterol and the lipid profile: review, synthesis and recommendations. Sports Med. 2014;44(2):211–21.

Wadden TA, Vogt RA, Andersen RE, Bartlett SJ, Foster GD, Kuehnel RH, et al. Exercise in the treatment of obesity: effects of four interventions on body composition, resting energy expenditure, appetite, and mood. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1997;65(2):269–77.

Sillanpaa E, Hakkinen K, Holviala J, Hakkinen A. Combined strength and endurance training improves health-related quality of life in healthy middle-aged and older adults. Int J Sports Med. 2012;33(12):981–6.

Trost SG, Owen N, Bauman AE, Sallis JF, Brown W. Correlates of adults’ participation in physical activity: review and update. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2002;34(12):1996–2001.

Sallis J, Owen N. Physical activity and behavioral medicine. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 1999.

Guthold R, Strong T, Chatterji K, Morabia S. Worldwide variability in physical inactivity - a 51-country survey. Am J Prev Med. 2008;34(6):486–94.

Dishman R, Heath G, Lee I. Physical activity epidemiology (2nd edition). Champaign: Human Kinetics; 2012.

Yore MM, Ham SA, Ainsworth BE, Kruger J, Reis JP, Kohl HW 3rd, et al. Reliability and validity of the instrument used in BRFSS to assess physical activity. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2007;39(8):1267–74.

Bennie JA, Kolbe-Alexander T, Seghers J, Biddle SJH, De Cocker K. Trends in muscle-strengthening exercise among nationally representative samples of U.S. adults between 2011 and 2017. J Phys Act Health. 2020; In press (accepted February 25th, 2020).

Bennie J, Smith J, Marvos Y, Biddle S, Kolbe-Alexander T. The neglected guideline - resistance exercise and public health. J Sci Med Sport. 2019;22:S9.

Rhodes RE, Lubans DR, Karunamuni N, Kennedy S, Plotnikoff R. Factors associated with participation in resistance training: a systematic review. Br J Sports Med. 2017;51(20):1466–72.

Dworkin SL. “Holding back”: negotiating a glass ceiling on women’s muscular strength. Sociol Perspect. 2001;44(3):333–50.

Howe HS, Welsh TN, Sabiston CM. The association between gender role stereotypes, resistance training motivation, and participation. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2017;33(Supplement C):123–30.

Lavallee ME, Balam T. An overview of strength training injuries: acute and chronic. Curr Sports Med Rep. 2010;9(5):307–13.

Download references

Acknowledgements

No financial support was received for the conduct of this study or preparation of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Physically Active Lifestyles Research Group (USQ PALs), Centre for Health Research, Institute for Resilient Regions, University of Southern Queensland, Education City, 37 Sinnathamby Boulevard, Springfield Central, Queensland, 4300, Australia

Jason A. Bennie, Jane Shakespear-Druery & Katrien De Cocker

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Bennie conceptualised the idea for the paper. Bennie, Shakespear-Druery and De Cocker wrote the paper. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jason A. Bennie .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate, consent for publication, competing interests.

Jason Bennie, Jane Shakespear-Druery and Katrien De Cocker declare that they have no conflicts of interest relevant to the content of this article.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Bennie, J.A., Shakespear-Druery, J. & De Cocker, K. Muscle-strengthening Exercise Epidemiology: a New Frontier in Chronic Disease Prevention. Sports Med - Open 6 , 40 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40798-020-00271-w

Download citation

Received : 27 March 2020

Accepted : 12 August 2020

Published : 26 August 2020

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40798-020-00271-w

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Strength training
Public health
Health surveillance
Physical activity

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

Advanced Search
Journal List
v.8(3); 2022 Mar

Sports Medicine and Movement Sciences

Giuseppe musumeci.

a Department of Biomedical and Biotechnological Sciences, Human Anatomy and Histology Section, School of Medicine, University of Catania, Via S. Sofia 87, 95123, Catania, Italy

b Research Center on Motor Activities (CRAM), University of Catania, 95123, Catania, Italy

c Department of Biology, College of Science and Technology, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, 19122, USA

Sports Medicine is a relatively new topic in medicine and includes a variety of medical and paramedical fields. Although sports medicine is mistakenly thought to be mainly for sports professionals/athletes, it actually encompasses the entire population, including the active and non-active healthy populations, as well as the sick [ 1 ]. Sports medicine also engages amateur sportsmen and strives to promote physical activity and quality of life in the general population. Hence, the field involves all ages from childhood to old age, aiming to preserve and support every person at every age. Sports medicine, which started developing in the 19 th century, is today a medical speciality.

Currently, there exist different technologies applied in the world of sports medicine dedicated to the detection of health problems. Evidence has demonstrated that virtual environments can be useful therapeutic tools with demonstrated positive outcomes. Modern technological advances have led to the implementation of digital devices, such as wearables and smartphones, which have been shown to provide opportunities for healthcare professionals and researchers to monitor physical activity and therefore engage patients in daily exercising. Additionally, the use of digital devices has emerged as a promising tool for improving frequent health data collection, disease monitoring, and supporting public health surveillance. The leveraging of digital data has laid the foundation for the development of a new concept of epidemiological study, known as “Digital Epidemiology”, which could contribute in the future to personalized and precision sports medicine.

The understanding of the importance of physical activity and fitness as part of a healthy lifestyle is increasing all over the world, as well as the number of amateur athletes and the profession of sports medicine takes a big part in this process.

Physical inactivity is the fourth leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide [ 2 ]. Regular physical activity is highly beneficial for the primary, secondary and tertiary management of many common chronic conditions. There is considerable evidence for the benefits of physical activity for cardiovascular disease, diabetes, obesity, musculoskeletal conditions, some cancers, mental health and dementia [ 3 ]. Yet there remains a large evidence-practice gap between physicians’ knowledge of the contribution of physical inactivity to chronic disease and routine effective assessment and prescription of physical activity.

The benefits of physical activity for the prevention and treatment of many chronic diseases are well established, including the infection of Sars-CoV-2. Considering the countless positive effects of exercise, planning an adapted physical activity in all phases of recovery (bed rest, rehabilitation, and post-hospitalization) of the patient represents an important strategy to mitigate the decline of cognitive functions and improve the physical and psychological wellbeing of subjects affected by COVID-19. Physical activity, if adapted to the needs of the individual, practiced consistently and regularly, shows a positive influence on the immune system due to its natural protective and anti-inflammatory action. Correct and constant physical exercise, even at home, at all ages and especially in the elderly, is an extra shield against Sars-CoV-2 [ 4 ]. Thanks to the Adapted Physical Activity patients improve the skills: psychological, mental, cardiorespiratory and muscular.

For some chronic conditions, structured exercise interventions are at least as effective as drug therapy. The adapted physical activity should be prescribed in the same way as pharmacological treatment, deciding on the “dosage” and “formulation” for each patient. The “dosage” is calculated to reach a specific level of efficacy that prevents or improves symptoms but does not result in toxic effects [ 3 ]. The exercise regime should always be "adapted" personalized and "tailored" since the level of exercise will depend on the tolerability of the individual, since the body of each of us always responds differently. No do-it-yourself or generalized training/protocols should be allowed, because physical activity if done poorly, can cause more damage than a sedentary lifestyle. As stated by the American College of Sports Medicine, physical activity should be prescribed/administered, alternatively or in association with drug treatment by the Sports and/or Family Physician and/or the Kinesiologist [ 5 ].

With sincere satisfaction and pride, I present to you the Special Issue titled “Sports Medicine and Movement Sciences” . This Special Issue bridging the gap between science and practice in the promotion of exercise and health and in the scientific assessment, study, and understanding of sports performance, sports injury prevention and treatment, exercise for health as non-surgical and non-pharmacological treatments, rehabilitation techniques, adapted physical activity, drugs in sport, and recommendations for training and nutrition.

This Special issue comprises 3 review articles and 16 original research publications from a number of Sports Medicine and Movement Sciences researchers [ 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 ]. Taken together, these articles are geared toward the advancement of our understanding Sports Medicine and Movement Sciences arena, including: Cognitive function; Brain health; Gait analysis; Biomechanics; Health sciences; Physiology; Physical activity; Occupational health; Musculoskeletal system; Evidence-based medicine; Aerobic threshold; Anaerobic threshold; Maximal oxygen uptake; Neuroscience; Exercise; Physical Activity; Balance; Metastability; Neuromuscular control; Prevention; Rehabilitation; Health Promotion; Anatomy; Health Technology; Three-dimensional motion analysis; Reliability; knee injury; Athletic pubalgia; Cardiology; Women's Health; Female athletes; Applied psychology; Clinical psychology; Paralympic sport; Goalball; Soccer; Cognitive psychology; Quality of life; Disability; Regenerative medicine; Osteoarthritis; Virtual reality; Sensorimotor control; Sports injury prevention; Epidemiology; Public health; Psychology; COVID-19; Pandemic; Quarantine; Home based exercise; IPAQ-SF; Psychological well-being; PGWBI; Nerve injury; Nerve regeneration; Therapeutic exercise; Wearable technologies; Sprint initiation; Step technique; Multi-directional movement; Novel training environments and digital devices; Adherence; Breast cancer; Lifestyle; Public Health and Digital Epidemiology.

I hope that readers of Heliyon enjoy reading these significant contributions that remind us of the crucial importance of interdisciplinary collaboration between those working in Sports Medicine and their counterparts in Movement Sciences.

Conflict of interest declaration

The author of this editorial does not have any conflict of interests.

Acknowledgements

The author of this editorial wishes to thank all authors who have contributed to this Special Issue and express his gratitude to Heliyon Clinical Research editorial Team for their assistance and co-operation, in particular Dr. Christian Schulz the Lead Editor of Heliyon and Dr. Lo, On Ching the Editorial Team Leader of Heliyon Clinical Research. Special thanks to the publishing group (Cell Press) who encouraged and made possible the realization of this special issue.

Supplements
Most Read Articles
Most Cited Articles
Editorial board
Authors instructions
For Reviewers

Journal of Sports Science and Medicine (JSSM) is a nonprofit scientific electronic journal, publishing research and case studies, and review article in the fields of sports medicine and exercise sciences. JSSM is an open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the definition of open access. JSSM is published quarterly in March, June, September and December. JSSM also publishes editorials, letter to editors, abstracts of congress, panel, conference and symposium, and can function as an open discussion forum on significant issues in the sports medicine and exercise sciences. Articles written in English should be sent to JSSM. The journal content could be presented not only in print (pdf format) but also through the use of video, audio and interactive software since it is being published as an electronic journal. Authors, therefore, are encouraged to submit articles those use all appropriate media.

Email alerts

The Journal of Sports Science and Medicine (JSSM) is a non-profit making scientific electronic journal, publishing research and review articles, together with case studies, in the fields of sports medicine and the exercise sciences...

Current Issue

Research article

Issue of the JSSM which will be online soon.
The final citation details, e.g. volume, publication year and page numbers will not be changed.
Therefore, please be aware that, they are fully ready and have all bibliographic details for your citations. a-->

In Press

Issues	About	Authors

Access Member Benefits
Current Sports Medicine Reports

Current Sports Medicine Reports, CSMR journal cover

CSMR provides peer-reviewed case reports and section articles in the following topical areas:

Head, Neck and Spine Conditions
General Medical Conditions
Abdominal and Chest Conditions
Environmental Conditions
Sideline and Event Management
Training, Prevention and Rehabilitation
Exercise is Medicine
Nutrition and Ergogenic aids
Extremity and Joint Conditions
Sport-specific Illness and Injury
Competitive Athletes
Special Populations

ISSN: 1537-890X Journal Impact Factor: 1.7 Check out Current Sports Medicine Reports on Facebook and Twitter !

Interested in learning more about the journal?

Visit the journal site for current and past issues.
Authors interested in having their proposed article considered for peer review and possible publication should email a copy of their abstract and brief reference list to the journal editorial office .
View the author instructions for specific guidelines.
Visit the submission site .

Paper of the Year

View the current and previous Paper of the Year selections and editorials covering the selected article. CSMR Paper of the Year

ACSM Journals - Featured Articles

Get the scoop from the best - ACSM's Editors-in-Chief select featured articles for each new issue.

CSMR Featured Articles

2024 Election Results
News Archive
Certification Task Force
Advertise with ACSM
Current Partners
Rankings Archive
Blogs and Resources
National Youth Sports Health & Safety Institute
Annual Report 2022
Annual Report 2023
Annual Report 2024
Honor & Citation Awards
Strategic Plan
Student Membership
Alliance Membership
Professional-in-Training Membership
Professional Membership
Renew Membership
Regional Chapters
Member Code of Ethics
ACSM Member Spotlight
Group Exercise Instructor
ACSM Personal Trainer Prep
ACSM Exercise Physiologist Prep
ACSM Clinical Exercise Physiologist Prep
Beijing Institute of Sports Medicine
Wellness Academy
Frequently Asked Questions
Recertification FAQs
Find an ACSM Certified Professional
Certified Professional of the Year
Wellcoaches
Certified Professional Discounts
Hire ACSM Certified Professionals
Inclusive Fitness Specialist Certificate
ceOnline FAQs
Approved Providers
Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews
Exercise, Sport, and Movement
Health & Fitness Journal
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
Translational Journal
Paper of the Year Awards
ACSM's Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Prescription
ACSM's Resources for the Personal Trainer
ACSM's Resources for the Exercise Physiologist
ACSM's Clinical Exercise Physiology
ACSM's Resources for the Group Exercise Instructor
ACSM's Certification Review
ACSM's Foundations of Strength Training and Conditioning
ACSM's Nutrition Exercise Science
ACSM's Essentials of Youth Fitness
ACSM's Introduction to Exercise Science
ACSM's Health/Fitness Facility Standards and Guidelines
ACSM’s Body Composition Assessment
ACSM's Complete Guide to Fitness and Health
Preparticipation Physical Evaluation (PPE) Monograph, 5th Edition
ACSM's Fitness Assessment Manual
ACSMs Exercise Testing and Prescription
Textbook Adoption
Translated Position Stands
ACSM Official Statements
Team Physician Consensus Statements
Resource Library
ACSM Fitness Trends
Autism and Exercise
Sudden Cardiac Arrest
Mental Health
Physical Activity Guidelines
Reducing Sedentary Behavior
Sex Differences and Transgender Athlete Care
Faculty Resources
EIM Clinical Resources
Black History Month
ACSM's Brown Bag Series (archived)
Emerging Physician Leaders Pilot Program
Annual Meeting
IDEA & ACSM Health & Fitness Summit
Advanced Team Physician Course
Sports Medicine Essentials
Integrative Physiology of Exercise Conference
International Team Physician Course
Regional Chapter Meetings
Meeting Exhibits and Sponsors
Research & Program Grants
Howard G. "Skip" Knuttgen Scholar Award
Travel and Research Awards
ACSM Research Grant Recipients
ACSM Travel Award Recipients
Dedicated Endowments & Funds
Planned Giving / Discovery Society

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

View all journals
Explore content
About the journal
Publish with us
Sign up for alerts
31 March 2021

Sports science

Richard Hodson

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

The competition to be crowned the fastest, strongest or most technically proficient sportsperson on the planet will once again reach its peak this summer when athletes descend on Tokyo for the Olympic Games. The global pandemic might rule out the throng of enthusiastic spectators that are typical of such an event, but millions will eagerly watch on television as the very best go toe-to-toe.

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 51 print issues and online access

185,98 € per year

only 3,65 € per issue

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Nature 592 , S1 (2021)

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-00814-5

This article is part of Nature Outlook: Sports science , an editorially independent supplement produced with the financial support of third parties. About this content .

Cell biology
Machine learning

The heart is put at risk of rupture by cells bordering damaged tissue

News & Views 28 AUG 24

Sympathetic neuropeptide Y protects from obesity by sustaining thermogenic fat

Article 28 AUG 24

A familiar drug can repair a broken heart

Research Highlight 26 AUG 24

Lysosomes drive the piecemeal removal of mitochondrial inner membrane

Article 21 AUG 24

Inner membrane turns inside out to exit mitochondrial organelles

News & Views 21 AUG 24

Stem cells tightly regulate dead cell clearance to maintain tissue fitness

Researchers built an ‘AI Scientist’ — what can it do?

News 30 AUG 24

LLMs produce racist output when prompted in African American English

Urgently clarify how AI can be used in medicine under new EU law

Correspondence 27 AUG 24

Global Faculty Recruitment of School of Life Sciences, Tsinghua University

The School of Life Sciences at Tsinghua University invites applications for tenure-track or tenured faculty positions at all ranks (Assistant/Ass...

Beijing, China

Tsinghua University (The School of Life Sciences)

Tenure-Track/Tenured Faculty Positions

Tenure-Track/Tenured Faculty Positions in the fields of energy and resources.

Suzhou, Jiangsu, China

School of Sustainable Energy and Resources at Nanjing University

ATLAS - Joint PhD Program from BioNTech and TRON with a focus on translational medicine

5 PhD positions for ATLAS, the joint PhD Program from BioNTech and TRON with a focus on translational medicine.

Mainz, Rheinland-Pfalz (DE)

Translational Oncology (TRON) Mainz

Alzheimer's Disease (AD) Researcher/Associate Researcher

Xiaoliang Sunney XIE’s Group is recruiting researchers specializing in Alzheimer's disease (AD).

Changping Laboratory

Supervisory Bioinformatics Specialist CTG Program Head

The National Library of Medicine (NLM) is a global leader in biomedical informatics and computational health data science and the world’s largest b...

Bethesda, Maryland (US)

National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information

Quick links

Explore articles by subject
Guide to authors
Editorial policies

The American Sports Medicine Institute (ASMI) is a national and international leader in sports medicine research related to clinical and surgical outcomes, biomechanics, and rehabilitation. The foci of ongoing studies at ASMI includes both clinical and biomechanical research, and our team includes researchers with expertise in motion capture biomechanics, cadaver joint biomechanics, outcomes research, clinical trials, biostatistics, and human anatomy.

ASMI’s mission is to improve the understanding, prevention, and treatment of sports-related injuries through research and education. In our strive for this mission, ASMI studies are regularly published in high-impact sports medicine journals, presented at scientific meetings, publicized in the media, and utilized in bodies creating sports safety policies.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is sports medicine? Sports medicine is a field of medicine concerned with the prevention and treatment of injuries and disorders that are related to participation in sports.
Does your research only include athletes? The mission of ASMI is to improve the understanding, prevention, and treatment of sports-related injuries through research and education. This includes everyone from youth to professional athletes, as well as recreational adult athletes and people working to be healthy and fit. Our research team also explores treatment outcomes of non-athletes, particularly those with orthopaedic injuries or surgeries.
What is the difference between biomechanical research and clinical research? ASMI’s biomechanics studies the motions and forces to minimize injury risk and maximize performance in sports. Other biomechanical studies at ASMI investigate the strength of human joints after surgery compared to their natural, undamaged state. Clinical research at ASMI involves both observational studies and clinical trials. Observational studies generally include examination of what is already occurring (no intervention), whereas clinical trials are carefully designed experiments that involve a specific treatment or intervention. Specifically, our clinical team works to evaluate surgical outcomes, rehabilitation efficacy, as well as injury mechanisms and prevention to improve treatment of sports-related and orthopaedic injuries. Importantly, our biomechanical and clinical research teams work closely together to fulfill the mission of ASMI.
How can I get involved in research at ASMI? Being involved in ASMI research means contributing to knowledge that directly improves the prevention and treatment of sports-related injuries. We work closely with our local physician and surgeon partners and other collaborators around the country and world to achieve these impactful research goals. Opportunities to participate in research at ASMI’s center in Birmingham are available for students and scholars of all levels. Learn more about how to get involved here .

Biomechanical Research

Our Biomechanical Research department works extensively to further our goal of preventing injury in sports.

Clinical Research

Our Clinical Research department is instrumental in improving treatment for sports related injuries.

Student Researcher Program

The Student Researcher Program is an opportunity for college undergraduate students, graduate students, and others to participate in research at ASMI for thesis or school credit.

‘Athletes’, ‘Talents’, and ‘Players’: Conceptual Distinctions and Considerations for Researchers and Practitioners

Current Opinion
Open access
Published: 29 August 2024

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

Adam Grainger ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3236-4859 1 , 2 , 3 ,
Adam L. Kelly ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-4929-1067 4 ,
Stephen W. Garland ORCID: orcid.org/0009-0002-7460-562X 5 ,
Joseph Baker ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5686-1737 6 ,
Kathryn Johnston ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5956-5810 6 &
Alexander B. T. McAuley ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5473-8877 4

2 Altmetric

A clearer understanding of, and tighter boundaries between, terms are important for researchers designing studies as well as for other sport stakeholders creating evidence-informed policies. This article considers the terms ‘athlete’, ‘talent’, and ‘player’ from psychological and sociocultural perspectives and in different sporting communities to highlight the importance of terminological clarity in sport research. We present considerations to clarify the use of these terms within different contexts and how the use of specific terms may affect knowledge mobilization in diverse sporting populations. A conceptual discussion is provided to help operationalize development-related terminology and its associated stages, to better reflect contemporary academic thought, and enhance practical interpretations. Importantly, we also call for greater transparency from researchers when presenting findings and encourage practitioners to clearly define key terms when working in sport. Our intention in this paper is to energize readers to consider how we use language in athlete identification and development contexts, to stimulate deeper thought and discourse around the possible implications these terms may have at any point of an individual’s development in sport. Greater deliberation, identification, and acknowledgment of the drawbacks accompanying these terms will be needed before more confident assertions can be made on how researchers and practitioners could (or even should) implement certain terminology across youth sport contexts moving forward. This paper adds to a growing literature on the importance of clarity in terminology and acts as an impetus for those working in specific sports to co-design key terms used by researchers, practitioners, and policy makers.

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Inconsistencies in the use of certain words in relation to athlete development are common.

This paper adds to a growing literature on the importance of terminological clarity.

In particular, this paper advocates that researchers and practitioners working in specific sports clearly detail how they are using terms such as athlete, talent, and player.

1 Introduction

Effective application of scientific results to those who participate in sport and exercise requires a clear understanding of the context of the research (e.g., study design, participant characteristics) and how the results apply therein (e.g., analysis and interpretation). Underpinning this is a requirement for a common understanding of the terms and concepts used, along with their consistent application. While inconsistency may not always cause confusion because the sender and receiver of the message could be consistent with one another (i.e., they have the same understanding), it is unwise to assume this is always the case, especially in research when definitional clarity is imperative for minimizing misinterpretations and maximizing performance outcomes. Indeed, such misunderstandings could result in the misuse of resources, poor alignment of organizational priorities, or inefficient decision making, among other consequences. Resources such as time, funding, and facilities are limited, and most competitive sport organizations rely on precision and accuracy in pursuit of strategic goals. As a result, it is crucial that those involved in knowledge creation, sharing, and application (e.g., researchers, practitioners, and policy makers) consider the ways in which key terms are defined and used across time and space [ 1 ]. In particular, sport scientists should strive to use words as clearly, consistently, and objectively as possible [ 2 ].

Inconsistencies in the use of certain words in relation to athlete development [ 3 ], where the same word is used in different ways, or a variety of words are used to refer to the same thing, make it difficult to be sure to whom the results can be applied. For instance, the term “elite” has been used in a wide variety of sporting contexts, from under nine age groups to senior international levels as well as being inferred based on accumulated training and general experience [ 3 ]. The sections below consider some words that are commonly misconstrued and misinterpreted in sport, words describing those who participate in sport (i.e., organized individual or team activities), and examine their use across different contexts and phases of development.

2 Athlete, Athleticism, and Athletic

We first consider perhaps the most common descriptor of someone who participates in sport—an ‘athlete’. Dictionary definitions of ‘athlete’ vary from “a person who is very good at sports or physical exercise, especially one who competes in organized events” [ 4 ] to “an athlete is a person who does a sport, especially athletics, or track and field events” [ 5 ]. As noted, the term is used to describe a wide spectrum of the physically active population (i.e., those who participate in sport) and not just those who are proficient in a specific domain [ 2 ]. There are also different types of athletes described in the extant literature—recreational athletes, university/collegiate athletes, elite athletes, competitive athletes, and talented athletes, amongst others. These attributive adjectives can also be blurry and overlapping; tighter boundaries could be defined for such terms, and may improve research designs and knowledge uptake. For example, when does a recreational athlete become competitive? Or can that person be both at the same time?

It could be argued that to be considered an athlete, one must demonstrate athleticism (i.e., the combination of qualities such as speed, strength, and agility; [ 6 ]) and be athletic (i.e., physically strong and active, good at sports [ 7 ]). While these may appear intuitive, the classification and measurement of such terms are not clear. In a recent study by Till et al. [ 8 ], for example, practitioners perceived definitions of athleticism and long-term athletic development inconsistently. Additionally, researchers have highlighted that those involved in team sports require a diverse range of qualities (e.g., Cone [ 9 ]; Di Salvo et al., [ 10 ]; Little and Williams [ 11 ]; Oliver et al. [ 12 ]), speaking to the nuance and complexity of terms such as athleticism, athletic, and athlete.

High-level performance in a specific sport is very nuanced, and therefore a single expression or assessment of athleticism (e.g., jump height) is unrealistic. Despite several attempts by various researchers, there is no general consensus for athleticism [ 13 , 14 ]. Lloyd et al. (p. 1491 [ 15 ]) defined it as the “ability to repeatedly perform a range of movements with precision and confidence in a variety of environments, which require competent levels of motor skills, strength, power, speed, agility, balance, coordination, and endurance”. Turner et al. [ 14 ] recommended that multidisciplinary coaching staff in team sport settings align on a holistic indication of an individual’s athleticism to help inform selection and development. However, in team sport contexts, determining whether a specific participant is a good ‘athlete’ usually reflects the relationship between performance attributes and positive outcomes [ 16 ]—not an individual’s need to perform a specific athletic task well in isolation (i.e., sprinting, jumping). In other words, the focus is on whether an individual can use a specific athletic attribute to positively influence outcomes (i.e., speed of transition from defense to attack, goal threat from set pieces), usually regardless of the attribute’s relevance for future long-term development. When proposing the use of a framework to grade/score athleticism, Turner et al. [ 14 ] argued that although an individual’s jump height may have value to some stakeholders (e.g., athletic development staff), scores in isolation may not prove overly helpful for others. A coach, for example, is perhaps more concerned about how this attribute positively influences specific match outcomes (e.g., winning a header in soccer).

The broader relevance of an individual’s athleticism compared to his/her/their teammates may be equally (or more) important. Athleticism for a team sport player is known to improve outcomes at elite levels and is often vital during pivotal moments of a game (e.g., Di Salvo et al. [ 10 ]; Little and Williams5 [ 11 ]; Oliver et al. [ 12 ]). However, it is important to note that the purpose of individual development in team sports is not solely to produce athletes, but instead to promote the individual’s acquisition of a set of robust technical and tactical sport-specific skills that allows him/her/them to meet training and competition demands. It is also worth recognizing that sport in general also offers the opportunity to develop the individual beyond the sport (i.e., character traits, confidence, competence, social skills) [ 17 ]. From this perspective, an athlete (i.e., an individual with athleticism) is valued based on the extent to which these qualities relate to the execution of key tasks and performance demands. When using ‘athlete’ to describe participants in a study, we therefore encourage researchers and practitioners to provide sufficient information to capture their level of competition, while also explaining what they mean by using different terms such as athlete.

3 Categorization of Individuals in Team Sports: Athletes or Players?

Adding to the terminological confusion in sport is the definition of ‘player’. For example, the categorization of ‘player’ is commonly used in both applied and research settings from team sports to individual sports to sedentary games [ 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 ]. Specifically, practitioners and researchers have been shown to refer to some individual sport participants as players [ 19 ], despite this not always being a team activity (i.e., tennis players). This most likely relates to the verb used to describe the action of the sport (e.g., someone ‘plays’ tennis, but someone who cycles, ‘rides/cycles’, and would be considered a ‘rider/cyclist’ not a ‘player’). Moreover, people involved in team sports, such as coaches, spectators, and journalists, regularly use ‘player’ [ 22 ] to categorize participants in some sports (but not all). Additionally, some individual and team sport research has referred to both athletes and players simultaneously [18, 19,, 21], while other researchers (especially in genetics; McAuley et al. [ 23 ]) describe their participants as athletes instead of specific sport players.

Terminological blurriness is further evident in more sedentary sports. For instance, someone who participates in lower physical exertion activities (e.g., darts, snooker, chess) is also commonly known as a ‘player’ (e.g., darts player). Conversely, those who compete in other types of lower physical exertion activities are also (sometimes) called ‘athletes’. In e-sports, for instance, competitive and professional e-sport participants are often referred to as athletes, despite the activities being mostly sedentary [ 24 ]. However, consistency in this sporting categorization does not exist and some argue against e-sports’ place in ‘sport’ altogether [ 20 ].

It could be argued that those who participate in certain sports should perhaps be considered as players, instead of athletes, as the root of the term player is ‘play’. For instance, while some team sport individuals will be athletic, the term player may better capture someone who plays a game, often with fellow players in a dynamic and open setting, whereas an athlete may better capture someone whose competitive success is based to a greater extent on their athleticism (e.g., track and field) rather than their tactical, technical, psychological, and social abilities [ 25 , 26 ]. Considering the holistic methodology that is often deployed by coaches to aid development [ 27 , 28 ], this terminology may align better with this modern approach.

4 Exploring Alignment with Theoretical Models of Youth Development

Various theoretical models of development in sport have described participants as either ‘athlete’, ‘talent’, or ‘player’. For instance, some of the most well-known models include the Long-Term Athlete Development model [ 29 ] and the Foundations, Talent , Elite, and Mastery framework [ 30 ]. Other approaches have focused on the description of developmental processes and the prediction of expertise (see Bruner et al. [ 31 ] and Coutinho et al. [ 32 ] for reviews). Alongside the Developmental Model of Sports Participation (Côté [ 33 ]), these are perhaps the most recognized and implemented models across sport governing bodies by policy makers and within sport organizations [ 8 , 34 ].

Researchers have noted the lack of clarity around terms such as athlete and player in such models. Take, for example, Lloyd et al.’s [ 35 ] distinction between the terms ‘athlete’ and ‘talent’ in reference to models of youth development. In addition, some organizations have made adaptations to the terminology used in these theoretical models when applying them to their sport (e.g., The England Football Association and Canada Soccer’s implementation of a revised Long-Term Athlete Development model, referred to as the Long-Term Player Development model). Whilst it may be tempting to simply replace ‘athlete’ with ‘player’ in development models within team sports, these words may not be synonymous. Furthermore, differences in these terms could be particularly important at younger ages considering the positive association between an early profile of multisport engagement with success at adulthood (e.g., Barth et al. [ 36 ]; Güllich et al. [ 37 ]).

During childhood and preadolescence (i.e., up until approximately age 12 years), it is generally recommended that youth engage in a diverse range of sports and activities characterized by high levels of unstructured play that promote fun and social interaction to improve fundamental movement competency [ 38 ]. Later in development (e.g., after peak height velocity in some sports), youth enter more stable stages of development and should be physically and mentally ready to focus on one or two sports. This usually involves engaging in higher amounts of structured activity and deliberate practice in order to achieve expertise (e.g., the ‘investment years’ in the Developmental Model of Sports Participation; Côté and Vierimaa [ 38 ]). In many sports, a shift to more advanced elements of physical, psychological, and cognitive development occurs, often as these elements relate to competitive success.

From this perspective, ‘athlete’ and ‘player’ become anchors for the focus of development during these phases of the athlete pathway (i.e., developing elements of athleticism during early development and improving competitive play during later phases). More difficult to integrate is ‘talent’. Indeed, researchers and coaches have struggled to clarify what this word means in both scientific and practical settings. For example, Australia’s Foundations, Talent, Elite, and Mastery framework describes the period of development between early and late adolescence as the ‘talent phase’, whereby youth demonstrate their ‘potential’ (another unclear and inconsistently used word) and later have their ‘talent’ verified. However, this usage suggests ‘talent’ is not relevant at other times/stages in the athlete’s development and/or that ‘talent identification’ is appropriate during this specific phase of the pathway. More recent conceptualizations (e.g., Baker et al. [ 39 ]) position ‘talent’ as originating in innate biological structures that evolve through their interaction with environmental variables throughout development. From this perspective, it is not possible to separate a person into his/her/their ‘talent(s)’ versus his/her/their experiences because both are inextricably linked. However, this does not mean we should discard talent as a concept; rather, it simply means that we should use it in proper ways [ 40 ].

5 Contextual and Methodological Considerations

While a global approach to the terms used in competitive sport across different stages of development may seem beneficial, it is important to consider the contextual and methodological influences that could explain the terminological confusion often seen in sport settings. For instance, the sociocultural norms of diverse communities are important considerations for researchers and practitioners when interpreting relevant research findings and implementing them into applied settings. As an example, how the term athlete is perceived in North America (e.g., Canada) may differ from how it is understood in Europe (e.g., the UK). Indeed, although many of the highly cited English-speaking researchers in the field of youth sport typically derive from these regions [ 41 ], they often use different terms to define developmental models and pathways for youth in sport.

In some instances, researchers use the word athlete as a homogeneous term to describe all youth who are engaged in sport (see Baker et al. [ 40 ]; Bruner et al. [ 31 ]; Varghese et al. [ 42 ] for reviews). For instance, the Personal Assets Framework is commonly referred to as an athlete development model (e.g., Côté et al. [ 43 ]; Kelly et al. [ 44 ]), which aims to develop youth across all participation levels, and focuses on characteristics beyond physical/athletic competencies. In comparison, other researchers use the term athlete development to describe the development of physical/athletic qualities in youth sport settings (e.g., Balyi et al. [ 29 ]), whereas talent development is more commonly used to define more holistic pathways for youth in sport (e.g., Bailey and Collins [ 45 ]; Coutinho et al. [ 32 ]; Mills et al. [ 46 ]). Based on these factors, generalizing terms could have consequences for translating research into applied practice, as the reader and/or end user may have different interpretations of what specific terms mean based on his/her/their regional norms, which could lead to poor global implementation.

The potential impact of sociocultural factors on terminology can be exemplified by the differences between individualistic (i.e., communities in which individuals strive for self-realization) and collectivist (i.e., communities in which individuals prioritize the needs of the group rather than the individual) cultures [ 47 ]. In the context of sport, considerations regarding an athlete, talent, or player in an individualistic talent development pathway may be completely different to those of a collectivistic pathway. As an example, Brown et al. (in press) [ 48 ] showed how a sample of British South Asian cricketers cited a range of examples of how their actions would be perceived as respectful in their own culture (e.g., staying away from alcohol during team social activities, avoiding eye contact, and not challenging the coach or voicing their opinion), but potentially disrespectful in White British culture. Moreover, a systematic review of longitudinal talent identification and development literature highlighted that almost all research in this discipline written in English had been conducted in and by authors from individualistic nations [ 41 ], which is likely similar across other sport science disciplines. As such, it is plausible that the discourse of ‘best practice’ coupled with the language used in sport prioritizes individualistic approaches and, thus, potentially contradicts and marginalizes collectivistic behaviors, developmental strategies, and terminologies. It will be important to expand the knowledge on the methods and practices of more collectivist cultures to create a more detailed and diverse understanding of the language used in those contexts.

It is also important to highlight that many leading journals, empirical studies, and reviews are written in English. Whilst it could be considered the global language, it is not the native language of a large proportion of the world. This makes it even more important to ensure that the language used in sport is understandable and transferrable to those who are not native English speakers. We should not see this as a barrier, but rather should instead embrace this cultural diversity to broaden our horizons and work towards a common understanding. Using a common language could help dispel negative stereotypes and personal biases about different groups, as well as support cultural diversity through respecting and learning about ways of being that are not necessarily our own. Building common terminology could facilitate these interactions with others so we can build bridges across cultures. However, it should be noted that this will be a difficult task owing to the variety of languages spoken, adding further difficulty to creating global terminologies. This should not, however, be an excuse to use vague language, and efforts should be made to clearly define key terminologies within research and practice.

The complexity of applying a singular term and definition in research settings could also have implications on the uptake of knowledge and knowledge application. If the end user misinterprets key terminology, it could lead to actions and judgments that are misguided. Therefore, a knowledge mobilization approach is encouraged when designing methods to define key terminologies in the field of sport. The aim of knowledge mobilization is to encourage researchers and practitioners to work collaboratively to support evidence-informed policies and practices [ 49 ]. In the context of language, the co-design of consistent words and definitions will help with greater transparency and alignment between research and practice (e.g., shared mental model), whereby the terms used in research are moved from the study (e.g., article, book, conference, laboratory) into the hands of people and organizations who can put them to practical use [ 50 ]. Involving practitioners in the creation of definitions will also improve clarity, as researchers can be over-confident regarding the transferability of their results to real-life settings, whereas practitioners may not have the skills or resources (e.g., financial, human, time) to translate research results into practice.

Based on the contextual (e.g., sociocultural norms, individualism and collectivism, native language, game/sport type) and methodological (e.g., embrace diversity and diverse perspectives, prioritize collaboration and co-design, use clear and consistent terminology, practice knowledge mobilization) considerations presented above, it is unlikely there will be universally accepted (and utilized) definitions of athlete, talent, or player in the immediate future. It is hoped this discussion encourages stakeholders to take initial steps toward more concrete understandings and alignment with terms used in athlete development contexts. At the very least, researchers should be explicit in their rationale and relay unbiased balanced conclusions to allow the audience to draw their own interpretations. As illustrated by McAuley et al. [ 3 ], this should include transparency in the elements that are relevant to the categorization of sport participants, such as: (a) age; (b) competition level; (c) league status; (d) sex; (e) international ranking; (f) nationality; (g) province/state; (h) sport; and (i) success/achievements.

6 Conclusions

Achieving generalizable definitions of specific sporting cohorts may be difficult because of contextual and methodological interpretations. However, clearer definitional boundaries for which terms can be used and operationalized are of importance in future research to better reflect contemporary academic thought and drive future athletic and technical development planning. We propose a conceptual distinction between terms used to describe different types of sport participants at different stages of development. Distinguishing between these terms may better capture differences in the activities current frameworks of development suggest youth should be engaged in at different developmental timepoints. In addition, discussions of what different words mean in different contexts encourage a more thorough understanding of the power of language in coaching and athlete development settings.

Johnston K, McAuley ABT, Kelly AL, Baker J. Language games and blurry terminology: can clarity enhance athlete development? Front Sports Active Living. 2023;5:1150047. https://doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2023.1150047 .

Article Google Scholar

McKinney J, Velghe J, Fee J, Isserow S, Drezner JA. Defining athletes and exercisers. Am J Cardiol. 2019;123(3):532–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2018.11.001 .

Article PubMed Google Scholar

McAuley ABT, Baker J, Kelly AL. Defining “elite” status in sport: from chaos to clarity. German J Exerc Sport Res. 2022;52(1):193–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12662-021-00737-3 .

Cambridge English Dictionary. 2023. Available from: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/athlete . Accessed 26 Jun 2023.

Collins Dictionary. 2023. Available from: https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/athlete#:~:text=An%20athlete%20is%20a%20person,real%20life%20again%20after%20retiring.&text=You%20can%20refer%20to%20someone,and%20athletic%20as%20an%20athlete . Accessed 26 Jun 2023.

Mirriam-Webster Dictionary. 2023. Available from: https://www.merriam webster.com/dictionary/athleticism?utm_campaign=sd&utm_medium=serp&utm_source=jsonld. [Accessed 26 Jun 2023].

Collins Dictionary. 2023. Available from: https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/athletic . Accessed 26 Jun 2023.

Till K, Lloyd RS, McCormack S, Williams G, Baker J, Eisenmann JC. Optimising long-term athletic development: an investigation of practitioners’ knowledge, adherence, practices and challenges. PLoS ONE. 2022;17(1): e0262995. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0262995 .

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Cone JR. Soccer-specific performance testing of fitness and athleticism: the development of a comprehensive player profile. Strength Cond J. 2012;34(5):11–9. https://doi.org/10.1519/SSC.0b013e3182575e8c .

Di Salvo V, Gregson W, Atkinson G, Tordoff P, Drust B. Analysis of high intensity activity in Premier League soccer. Int J Sports Med. 2009;30(03):205–12. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0028-1105950 .

Little T, Williams AG. Specificity of acceleration, maximum speed, and agility in professional soccer players. J Strength Cond Res. 2005;19(1):76–8. https://doi.org/10.1519/14253.1 .

Oliver JL, Armstrong N, Williams CA. Relationship between brief and prolonged repeated sprint ability. J Sci Med Sport. 2009;12(1):238–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams.2007.09.006 .

Gamble P. What do we mean by athletic: the 10 pillars of athleticism. 2016. Available from: https://informedinsport.com/new-blog/2016/9/30/the-pillars-of-athleticism . Accessed 17 Oct 2023.

Turner AN, Jones B, Stewart P, Bishop C, Parmar N, Chavda S, et al. Total score of athleticism: holistic athlete profiling to enhance decision-making. Strength Cond J. 2019;41(6):91–101. https://doi.org/10.1519/SSC.0000000000000506 .

Lloyd RS, Cronin JB, Faigenbaum AD, Haff GG, Howard R, Kraemer WJ, et al. National Strength and Conditioning Association position statement on long-term athletic development. J Strength Cond Res. 2016;30(6):1491–509. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000001387 .

Bergkamp TL, Frencken WG, Niessen ASM, Meijer RR, den Hartigh RJ. How soccer scouts identify talented players. Eur J Sport Sci. 2022;22(7):994–1004.

Opstoel K, Chapelle L, Prins FJ, De Meester A, Haerens L, Van Tartwijk J, et al. Personal and social development in physical education and sports: a review study. Eur Phys Educ Rev. 2020;26(4):797–813.

Fort-Vanmeerhaeghe A, Bishop C, Buscà B, Aguilera-Castells J, Vicens-Bordas J, Gonzalo-Skok O. Inter-limb asymmetries are associated with decrements in physical performance in youth elite team sports athletes. PLoS ONE. 2020;15(3): e0229440.

Kovalchik SA, Reid M. Comparing matchplay characteristics and physical demands of junior and professional tennis athletes in the era of big data. J Sports Sci Med. 2017;16(4):489–97.

PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Parry J. E-sports are not sports. Sport Ethics Philos. 2019;13(1):3–18.

Scantlebury S, Till K, Sawczuk T, Phibbs P, Jones B. Navigating the complex pathway of youth athletic development: challenges and solutions to managing the training load of youth team sport athletes. Strength Cond J. 2020;42(6):100–8.

CNBC. Tom Brady isn’t a ‘great natural athlete’. 2 February, 2018. Available from: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/02/bill-belichick-tom-brady-isnt-a-great-natural-athlete-but-he-has-these-3-traits.html . Accessed 17 Oct 2023.

McAuley ABT, Hughes DC, Tsaprouni LG, Varley I, Suraci B, Roos TR, et al. Genetic association research in football: a systematic review. Eur J Sport Sci. 2021;21(5):714–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/17461391.2020.1776401 .

Jenny SE, Manning RD, Keiper MC, Olrich TW. Virtual(ly)aAthletes: where eSports fit within the definition of “sport.” Quest. 2017;69(1):1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/00336297.2016.1144517 .

Sarmento H, Anguera MT, Pereira A, Araújo D. Talent identification and development in male football: a systematic review. Sports Med. 2018;48(4):907–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-017-0851-7 .

Williams AM, Ford PR, Drust B. Talent identification and development in soccer since the millennium. J Sports Sci. 2020;38(11–12):1199–210.

Bergeron MF, Mountjoy M, Armstrong N, Chia M, Côté J, Emery CA, et al. International Olympic Committee consensus statement on youth athletic development. Br J Sports Med. 2015;49(13):843–51. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2015-094962 .

Bowles R, O’Dwyer A. Athlete-centred coaching: perspectives from the sideline. Sports Coach Rev. 2020;9(3):231–52.

Balyi I, Hamilton A. Long-term athlete development: trainability in childhood and adolescence. Olympic Coach. 2004;16(1):4–9.

Google Scholar

Gulbin JP, Croser MJ, Morley EJ, Weissensteiner JR. An integrated framework for the optimisation of sport and athlete development: a practitioner approach. J Sports Sci. 2013;31(12):1319–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2013.781661 .

Bruner MW, Erickson K, Wilson B, Côté J. An appraisal of athlete development models through citation network analysis. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2010;11(2):133–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2009.05.008 .

Coutinho P, Mesquita I, Fonseca AM. Talent development in sport: a critical review of pathways to expert performance. Int J Sports Sci Coach. 2016;11(2):279–93. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747954116637499 .

Côté J. The influence of the family in the development of talent in sport. Sport Psychol. 1999;13(4):395–417. https://doi.org/10.1123/tsp.13.4.395 .

Weissensteiner JR. How contemporary international perspectives have consolidated a best-practice approach for identifying and developing sporting talent. In: Baker J, Cobley S, Schorer J, Wattie N, editors. Routledge handbook of talent identification and development in sport. Taylor & Francis; 2017.

Lloyd RS, Oliver JL, Faigenbaum AD, Howard R, Croix MBDS, Williams CA, et al. Long-term athletic development-part 1: a pathway for all youth. J Strength Cond Res. 2015;29(5):1439–50. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000000756 .

Barth M, Güllich A, Macnamara BN, Hambrick DZ. Predictors of junior versus senior elite performance are opposite: a systematic review and meta-analysis of participation patterns. Sports Med. 2022;52(6):1399–416. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-021-01625-4 .

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Güllich A, Macnamara BN, Hambrick DZ. What makes a champion? Early multidisciplinary practice, not early specialization, predicts world-class performance. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2022;17(1):6–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620974772 .

Côté J, Vierimaa M. The developmental model of sport participation: 15 years after its first conceptualization. Sci Sports. 2014;29:S63–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scispo.2014.08.133 .

Baker J, Wattie N, Schorer J. A proposed conceptualization of talent in sport: the first step in a long and winding road. Psychol Sport Exerc. 2019;43:27–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2018.12.016 .

Baker J, Gayman A, Johnston K. Lifespan models of athlete development: what have we learned from previous attempts? Front Sports Active Living. 2023;5:1179767. https://doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2023.1179767 .

Johnston K, Wattie N, Schorer J, Baker J. Talent identification in sport: a systematic review. Sports Med. 2018;48(1):97–109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-017-0803-2 .

Varghese M, Ruparell S, LaBella C. Youth athlete development models: a narrative review. Sports Health. 2022;14(1):20–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/1941738121105539 .

Côté J, Turnnidge J, Evans MB. The dynamic process of development through sport. Kinesiol Sloven. 2014;20:14–26.

Kelly AL, Erickson K, Turnnidge J. Youth sport in the time of COVID-19: Considerations for researchers and practitioners. Manag Sport Leisure. 2022;27(1–2):62–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/23750472.2020.1788975 .

Bailey R, Collins D. The standard model of talent development and its discontents. Kinesiol Rev. 2013;2(4):248–59. https://doi.org/10.1123/krj.2.4.248 .

Mills A, Butt J, Maynard I. Introducing an integrated model of talent development: from research to practice. J Sport Psychol Action. 2023;14(2):121–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/21520704.2022.2148798 .

Caldwell-Harris CL, Aycicegi A. When personality and culture clash: the psychological distress of allocentrics in an individualist culture and idiocentrics in a collectivist culture. Transcult Psychiatry. 2006;43(3):331–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/1363461506066982 .

Brown TW, Fletcher T, Gough LA, Khawaja I, Kelly AL. The experiences of British South Asian male cricketer’s on talent pathways and professional cricket. ( in press ).

Straus S, Tetroe J, Graham ID, editors. Knowledge translation in health care: moving from evidence to practice. 2nd ed. Chichester: Wiley; 2013.

Kelly A, Turnnidge J. From knowledge to action: bridging the gap between research and practice in youth soccer. In: Kelly A, editor. Talent identification and development in youth soccer: a guide for researchers and practitioners. ( in press ).

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Kitman Labs, Dublin, Ireland

Adam Grainger

Institute of Sport and Health, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dubin 4, Ireland

Ulster Rugby, Belfast, Northern Ireland

Research for Athlete and Youth Sport Development (RAYSD) Lab, Centre for Life and Sport Sciences (CLaSS), College of Life Sciences, Birmingham City University, Birmingham, UK

Adam L. Kelly & Alexander B. T. McAuley

Department of Sports Sciences, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden

Stephen W. Garland

Tanenbaum Institute for Science in Sport, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

Joseph Baker & Kathryn Johnston

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Adam Grainger .

Ethics declarations

Open Access funding provided by the IReL Consortium.

Conflicts of Interest/Competing Interests

Adam Grainger, Adam L. Kelly, Stephen W. Garland, Joseph Baker, Kathryn Johnston, and Alexander B.T. McAuley have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this article.

Ethics Approval

Not applicable.

Consent to Participate

Consent for publication, availability of data and material, code availability, authors’ contributions.

AG conceived the paper and he alongside AM, AK, SG, JB, and KJ performed the work and contributed to the manuscript writing tasks. All authors read and approved the final version.

Informed Consent

No consent to participation and publication were required because we did not have participants.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Grainger, A., Kelly, A.L., Garland, S.W. et al. ‘Athletes’, ‘Talents’, and ‘Players’: Conceptual Distinctions and Considerations for Researchers and Practitioners. Sports Med (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-024-02101-5

Download citation

Accepted : 05 August 2024

Published : 29 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-024-02101-5

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Find a journal
Publish with us
Track your research

COMMENTS

The American Journal of Sports Medicine: Sage Journals
The American Journal of Sports Medicine, founded in 1972, is the official publication of the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine.It contains original articles addressed to orthopaedic surgeons specializing in sports medicine, and to team physicians, athletic trainers, and physical therapists focusing on the causes and effects of injury or disease resulting from or affected by ...
Homepage
British Journal of Sports Medicine (BJSM) is a Plan S compliant Transformative Journal. British Journal of Sports Medicine (BJSM) is a multimedia portal for authoritative original research, systematic reviews, consensus statements and debate in sport and exercise medicine (SEM). We define sport and exercise medicine broadly. BJSM's web, print, video and audio material serves the ...
Articles
Comment on "Exercise Snacks and Other Forms of Intermittent Physical Activity for Improving Health in Adults and Older Adults: A Scoping Review of Epidemiological, Experimental and Qualitative Studies". Mingyue Yin. Hansen Li. Yongming Li. Letter to the Editor 22 July 2024 Pages: 2199 - 2203.
Articles
Aritra Majumdar, Rashid Bakirov and Tim Rees. Sports Medicine - Open 2024 10 :85. Letter Published on: 29 July 2024. The original article was published in Sports Medicine - Open 2024 10 :84. The Leading Article to this article has been published in Sports Medicine - Open 2022 8 :73. Full Text.
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. 56 (9):1830-1839, September 2024. * MSSE 2021 Paper of the Year *. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise (MSSE), ACSM's flagship monthly peer-reviewed journal, is the leading multidisciplinary original research journal for members. Each issue features original investigations, clinical studies and ...
Research in Sports Medicine
Research in Sports Medicine is a broad journal that aims to bridge the gap between all professionals in the fields of sports medicine. The journal serves an international audience and is of interest to professionals worldwide. The journal covers major aspects of sports medicine and sports science - prevention, management, and rehabilitation of sports, exercise and physical activity related ...
Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine
Featured Jobs. Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine is an international refereed journal published for clinicians with a primary interest in sports medicine practice. The journal publishes original research and reviews covering diagnostics, therapeutics, and rehabilitation in healthy and physically challenged individuals of all ages and levels of ...
American Journal of Sports Medicine
The American Journal of Sports Medicine (AJSM) is the official peer-reviewed scientific journal of the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM). Founded in 1972, AJSM is an essential forum for independent orthopaedic sports medicine research and education, allowing clinical practitioners the ability to make decisions based on sound scientific information.
Home page
Aims and scope. Sports Medicine - Open focuses on original research and definitive reviews in the field of sport and exercise medicine. The Journal includes medical and scientific research relating to: Sporting performance enhancement including nutrition, equipment and training. Medical syndromes associated with sport and exercise.
Home
Sports Medicine also welcomes the submission of high-quality original research in the above fields. As a hybrid journal, Sports Medicine does not charge authors to publish using the traditional subscription-based publishing route, but does offer the option to publish accepted articles open access if authors so wish or if their funders require ...
Research in Sports Medicine: Vol 32, No 5 (Current issue)
Incidence and burden of 671 injuries in professional women footballers: time to focus on context-specific injury risk reduction strategies. Olivier Materne et al. Published online: 19 Jun 2024. Explore the current issue of Research in Sports Medicine, Volume 32, Issue 5, 2024.
Research hotspots and trends on sports medicine of athletes: A
As injury is an inevitable part of sports participation, more and more attention has been paid to the research of sports medicine. Due to the rapid growth of sports medicine of athletes research, it is a challenge to entirely understand its research status and hotspots. ... Marx W. HistCite analysis of papers constituting the h index research ...
Sports Health: Sage Journals
Sports Health: A Multidisciplinary Approach (SPH) is a bi-monthly, peer-reviewed journal for primary care physicians, orthopaedic surgeons, physical therapists, athletic trainers and other medical and health care professionals involved in the training and care of the competitive or recreational athlete.SPH publishes review articles, original research articles, case studies, images, short ...
Muscle-strengthening Exercise Epidemiology: a New ...
This current opinion paper: i.Provides a narrative review of the emerging discipline of muscle-strengthening exercise epidemiology. ii.Argues the case for an increased emphasis on the role of muscle-strengthening exercise for chronic disease prevention. iii.Discusses key research gaps and strategies to advance this field
ACSM Journals
With our six leading scholarly journals, ACSM offers access to cutting-edge research, translational science, relevant clinical reports and evidence-informed practical content for researchers, students, clinicians, those working to improve health outcomes, and health and fitness professionals. Click on a journal cover to learn more.
The increasing importance of sports science and medicine
As such, optimising performance, improving the best players' availability, and decreasing the risk of injury have become the main thrusts of sports science and sports medicine when tied to high-performance teams. 5. Sports science research can help lead to evidence-based approaches that will allow athletes and active individuals to exercise ...
Sports Medicine and Movement Sciences
Sports Medicine is a relatively new topic in medicine and includes a variety of medical and paramedical fields. Although sports medicine is mistakenly thought to be mainly for sports professionals/athletes, it actually encompasses the entire population, including the active and non-active healthy populations, as well as the sick [].Sports medicine also engages amateur sportsmen and strives to ...
Aims and scope
Sports Medicine focuses on definitive and comprehensive review articles that interpret and evaluate the current literature to provide the rationale for and application of research findings in the sports medicine and exercise field. Major topics covered by reviews published in the journal include: Sports medicine and sports science, including performance research.
Journal of Sports Science and Medicine
Journal of Sports Science and Medicine. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine (JSSM) is a nonprofit scientific electronic journal, publishing research and case studies, and review article in the fields of sports medicine and exercise sciences. JSSM is an open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to the ...
Current Sports Medicine Reports (CSMR)
Respond to the needs of your patients. Current Sports Medicine Reports ( CSMR), a monthly e-journal for clinician members, responds to your unique information needs by addressing one sports medicine topic in-depth in each issue. This is one of the most thorough reviews of current sports medicine literature you'll find out there.
Research in Sports Medicine
Research in Sports Medicine is a broad journal that aims to bridge the gap between all professionals in the fields of sports medicine. The journal serves an international audience and is of interest to professionals worldwide. The journal covers major aspects of sports medicine and sports science - prevention, management, and rehabilitation of sports, exercise and physical activity related ...
Sports science
Sports science. The importance of science in elite sport — from helping athletes to train safely to protecting sporting integrity. The competition to be crowned the fastest, strongest or most ...
Advancements and challenges in bionic joint lubrication biomaterials
The use of lubricating materials in sports medicine is a compelling area of research that offers innovative solutions for the prevention and treatment of sports-related orthopaedic problems. Lubricating materials can mimic the lubrication mechanisms of natural organisms thereby reducing wear and tear and promoting tissue regeneration in joints ...
Research
The American Sports Medicine Institute (ASMI) is a national and international leader in sports medicine research related to clinical and surgical outcomes, biomechanics, and rehabilitation. The foci of ongoing studies at ASMI includes both clinical and biomechanical research, and our team includes researchers with expertise in motion capture ...
'Athletes', 'Talents', and 'Players': Conceptual Distinctions and
Adding to the terminological confusion in sport is the definition of 'player'. For example, the categorization of 'player' is commonly used in both applied and research settings from team sports to individual sports to sedentary games [18,19,20,21].Specifically, practitioners and researchers have been shown to refer to some individual sport participants as players [], despite this not ...
The many facets of physical activity, sports, and mental health
Two of the included articles use cohorts developed for aging research. In an article by Mudalige et al. ( Citation 2024 ), the Canadian Platform for Research Online to Investigate Health, Quality of Life, Cognition, Behaviour, Function and Caregiving in Aging (CAN-PROTECT) study is used to examine the relationship between physical activity and ...

British Journal of Sports Medicine

Topical Issues

Latest Articles

Featured Video

Most Read Articles

Current Issue

Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine

Secondary Logo

September 2024 - Volume 34 - Issue 5

Featured Supplements

Editor's Picks

American Journal of Sports Medicine

Additional Resources

Current Concepts/Journal CME

Video Abstracts

Muscle-strengthening Exercise Epidemiology: a New Frontier in Chronic Disease Prevention

Introduction

Defining Muscle-strengthening Exercise

Muscle-strengthening Exercise and Physical Activity Guidelines—a Recent Addition

Muscle-strengthening Exercise and Health

First, the Clinical

Now, the Epidemiological

Run, Lift or Both?—Emerging Epidemiological Evidence for Combining Aerobic MVPA and Muscle-strengthening Exercise

Assessment, Prevalence and Correlates of Muscle-strengthening Exercise in Health Surveillance

Muscle-strengthening Exercise Promotion—a Challenging Prospect

Moving Forward—Next Phases in Muscle-strengthening Exercise Epidemiology

Standardising Assessment

Beyond Frequency

Device-based Assessments

Beyond Sociodemographic Correlates

More Surveillance

Availability of Data and Materials

Abbreviations

Acknowledgements

Author information

Contributions

Corresponding author

Ethics declarations

Additional information

Rights and permissions

About this article

Share this article

Sports Medicine and Movement Sciences

Conflict of interest declaration

Acknowledgements

Interested in learning more about the journal?

Paper of the Year

ACSM Journals - Featured Articles

Sports science

Access options

Related Articles

Global Faculty Recruitment of School of Life Sciences, Tsinghua University

Tenure-Track/Tenured Faculty Positions

ATLAS - Joint PhD Program from BioNTech and TRON with a focus on translational medicine

Alzheimer's Disease (AD) Researcher/Associate Researcher

Supervisory Bioinformatics Specialist CTG Program Head

Quick links

Frequently Asked Questions

Biomechanical Research

Clinical Research

Student Researcher Program

‘Athletes’, ‘Talents’, and ‘Players’: Conceptual Distinctions and Considerations for Researchers and Practitioners

Cite this article

1 Introduction

2 Athlete, Athleticism, and Athletic

3 Categorization of Individuals in Team Sports: Athletes or Players?

4 Exploring Alignment with Theoretical Models of Youth Development

5 Contextual and Methodological Considerations

6 Conclusions

Author information

Corresponding author

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of Interest/Competing Interests

Ethics Approval

Consent to Participate

Informed Consent

Rights and permissions

About this article

Share this article

COMMENTS