Table 2 Longitudinal studies included in the systematic review
Author(s) (Year) | Sport performance level | Sex subgroup (sample size) | Reported age Mean age ± SD or range at first testing (years) | Testing timespan | Reported study design | Statistical approach | Dimensions | Reported measurements | Findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Unidimensional | |||||||||
Banzer et al. (2008) [44] | Tennis World-Class elite | Male (1) | NR | 7 years | Prospective, case-report | Cross-correlation for pairwise comparison | Physiological | VO2max | A strong relationship was found between VO2max and the following year’s ATP entry ranking during 7 years of professional tennis |
Gale-Watts & Nevill (2016) [46] | Tennis World-Class elite | Male (NR) | NR | 29 years | NR | Nonlinear cubic polynomial regression model | Anthropometric | Height, Weight, BMI, reciprocal ponderal index (RPI) | Elite male tennis athletes are becoming more power athletes as opposed to endurance athletes given the increase in BMI and decrease in RPI for Grand Slam tournament participants |
Martinent et al. (2018) [45] | Table tennis Competitive elite | Male (109) Female (50) Total (159) | NR NR 14.07 ± 2.13 | 6 years | NR | ANCOVA (active vs. dropout; international vs. national vs. regional) | Psychological | Sport motivation scale, coping inventory for competitive sport, athlete burnout questionnaire, recovery stress questionnaire | Results of ANCOVAs showed that players who still practiced at time 2 (T2; six years later; n = 130) reported lower time 1 (T1; while they were involved in intensive training centers) amotivation (large effect), disengagement-oriented coping, sport devaluation, and reduced accomplishment (moderate effects) than their counterparts who dropped out at T2 (n = 29). Results of ANCOVAs also showed that international (n = 18) and/or national players (n = 86) at T2 reported significantly lower T1 amotivation (large effect), disengagement-oriented coping, and sport devaluation (moderate effects) in comparison with regional (n = 26) players at T2. Finally, results of correlational analyses showed that T2 performance and/or 6-year performance progress were significantly and weakly correlated with introjected and external regulations, perceived stress, and perceived recovery, and significantly and moderately correlated with amotivation, disengagement-oriented coping, sport devaluation, and reduced accomplishment |
Two-dimensional | |||||||||
Faber et al. (2016) [53] | Table tennis Competitive elite | Male (24) Female (24) Total (48) | NR NR 7–11 | 2.5 years | Observational prospective | Generalized Estimating Equations analysis | Physiological Technical | Sprint, agility, VJ Speed while dribbling, aiming at target, ball skills, throwing a ball, eye-hand coordination | Perceptual-motor skills assessment outcomes do not predict competition participation Perceptual-motor skills assessment can objectify a young player’s potential when assessed at age 7–11 years. Yet, the Generalized Estimating Equations analysis, including the test items ‘aiming at target’, ‘throwing a ball’, and ‘eye-hand coordination’ in the best fitting model, revealed that the outcomes of the perceptual-motor skills assessment were significant predictors for future competition results (R2 = 51%) |
Faber et al. (2017) [54] | Table tennis Competitive elite | Male (739) Female (452) Total (1191) | NR NR 7–10 | 15 years | Observational, test–retest | Univariable and multivariable logistic and linear regression models | Physiological Technical | Sprint, agility Speed while dribbling, throwing a ball | The test items “sprint” and “throwing a ball” showed to be significant predictors for table tennis performance outcomes in boys (p < 0.05). For girls, besides these test items also “speed while dribbling” had a significant contribution (p < 0.05). Since the accuracies of the models were low, it is advised to include other determinants to enhance the predictive value of a model for table tennis performance |
Kanehisa et al. (2006) [47] | Tennis Competitive elite | Male | 2 years | NR | Friedman test, Wilcoxon test, Mann–Whitney U testa (table tennis players vs. non-athletes; compared only for strength test) | Anthropometric Physiological | Height, weight, thigh girth, cross-sectional area, skeletal age Dynamic Strength | The findings indicate that young tennis players who are in the earlier stage of adolescence increase the CSA of the quadriceps femoris muscle beyond the normally expected growth change. Also, they show a predominant development in torque generation capability during high-velocity knee extensions, with a greater gain in boys compared with girls | |
Elite (6) | 12.1 ± 0.5 | ||||||||
Control (29) | 11.5 – 14.4 | ||||||||
Female | |||||||||
Elite (6) | 12.0 ± 0.9 | ||||||||
Control (30) | 11.5 – 14.4 | ||||||||
Total (71) | NR | ||||||||
Kolman et al. (2021) [57] | Tennis Competitive elite | Male Total (29) | 13.4 ± 0.51 | 4 years | Prospective | Multiple linear regression analysis (future elite vs. future competitive) | Anthropometric Technical | Height, weight Ball speed, accuracy, percentage errors | Ball speed and accuracy were significant predictors of current and future performance (p < .001) in male youth tennis players, with R2 of .595 and .463, respectively. When controlling for age, a one-way MANCOVA revealed that future male elite players were more accurate than future competitive players (p = .048, 95% CI [.000–.489]), especially in variable compared to fixed game situations (p < .05) |
Kramer et al. (2016) [50] | Tennis Competitive elite | Male Total (256) | 10–15 | 5 years | Mixed-longitudinal | Multilevel random effects regression analyses | Anthropometric Physiological | Height, weight CMJ, 5-m sprint | Players developed their 5-m sprint performance with age. The development is related to longitudinal changes in body size and lower-body power in elite young tennis athletes aged 10–15 years |
Kramer et al. (2016) [48] | Tennis Competitive elite | Male (113) Female (83) Total (196) | NR NR 13–15 | 2 years | Mixed-longitudinal | Multilevel analysis (higher ranked vs. lower ranked) | Anthropometric Physiological | Height, weight SJ, CMJ, MBT, ball throwing, spider test, linear sprint tests | Physical fitness components for boys and girls improved over age (U14-U16) (ES .53–.97). In boys, the more mature boys outscored the less mature boys in upper and lower-body power from U14 to U16. In girls, high-ranked girls outscored lower-ranked girls on lower-body power, speed, and agility (U14–U16) (p < .05). In other words, boys and girls improved on all physical fitness components during U14–U16. In boys, power was related to maturity. In girls, lower-body power, speed, and agility were related to tennis performance |
Kramer et al. (2017) [49] | Tennis Competitive elite | Male (44) Female (42) Total (86) | 12.43 ± 0.30 12.48 ± 0.22 NR | 3 years | NR | Regression analyses | Anthropometric Physiological | Height, Sitting height, weight, leg length MBT, ball throw, SJ, CMJ, 5,- 10-m sprint, spider test | At U13, maturation and physical fitness are partly related to tennis performance. In boys, higher scores on upper body power resulted in better tennis performance. However, none of the physical fitness tests at U13 were a predictor for tennis performance at U16 for boys |
Kramer et al. (2021) [51] | Tennis Competitive elite | Female Total (167) | 10–15 | 9 years | Mixed-longitudinal | Multilevel analysis | Anthropometric Physiological | Height, weight CMJ, 5-m sprint speed | It was possible to predict sprint performance (5 m) based on chronological age, body size given by height, and lower limb strength performance (p < .05). Significantly different developmental patterns were found for elite and sub-elite players, with elite players aged 10–14 being faster. After age 14, no significant differences were found in sprint performance between elite and sub-elite players (p > .05) |
Madsen et al. (2018) [52] | Badminton Competitive elite | Male Total (10) | 13.5 ± 0.5 | 2 years | Longitudinal | One-way ANOVA for repeated measuresa (test performance of age groups) | Anthropometric Physiological | Height, weight, fat%, arm span, thigh circumference 30-m sprint, CMJ, badminton-specific speed, badminton-specific endurance, HR | Athletes improve badminton-specific speed over time, achieving values at U19 similar to world-class elite senior athletes. At U19, there is still a performance deficit in badminton-specific endurance compared to world-class elite senior athletes |
Three-dimensional | |||||||||
Chapelle et al. (2022) [58] | Tennis Competitive elite | Male (323) Female (215) Total (538) | 7–12 | 9 years | Cohort | Univariate binary logistic regressionsa | Anthropometric Physiology Technical | Body height, body weight, sitting height, maturity offset 5 m sprint speed, 20 m sprint speed, 505 COD test, standing broad jump (in series), balancing backward, sideways jumping (KTK) Throw and catch, hold tennis ball up | Significant odds ratios were found for all included anthropometric and physical performance determinants (p < 0.05), ranging from 0.26 to 7.50 in the male young tennis players and from 0.18 to 6.87 in the female young tennis players. The included determinants influenced selection opportunities mostly in the early age categories (U8–U10) as opposed to the later age categories (U11–U13) |
Siener & Hohmann (2019) [56] | Table tennis Competitive elite | Male (141) Female (84) Total (225) | 94.1 ± 5.2 months | 7 years | Prognostic validity | Linear discriminant analysis and neural network (multilayer perceptron) (talented [national level] vs. non-talented [club, local, regional level]) | Anthropometric Physiological Technical | Height, weight, BMI 20-m sprint, sideward jumping, balancing backward, bend forward, push-ups and sit-ups, standing long jump, 6-min run Ball-throw | A medium to high prognostic validity could be proven with the complete motor test battery as well as with the table tennis recommendation score. For table tennis, six of the nine tests are recommended (sideward jumping, push-ups, bend forward, standing long jump, ball-throw, and balancing backward) |
Siener et al. (2021) [59] | Tennis Competitive elite | Male (112) Female (62) Total (174) | 156.3 (132–206) months | 3 to 9 years | Retrospective (long-term) | MANCOVA, bivariate correlations | Anthropometric Physiological Technical | Height, weight 20-m sprint, sideward jumping, balancing backward, bend forward, push-ups, sit-ups, standing long jump, 6-min endurance run Ball-throw | No significant (p < 0.05) differences were found between ranked and non-ranked junior players in terms of U9 body weight and height. With the exception of flexibility, all physical fitness tests and motor competence tests showed significant results. The ball throw was the most relevant test parameter, as it showed the highest prognostic validity (effect size ƞ2 = .157 and r = .360). This test was followed by the two test tasks standing long jump (effect size ƞ2 = .081 and r = .287) and endurance run (effect size ƞ2 = .065 and r = .296) |
Zhao et al. (2020) [60] | Mixed Competitive elite | Male Table tennis (7) Badminton (4) Total (21) | 145.6 ± 8.0 months | 2 years | Mixed cross-sectional and longitudinal | Discriminant analysis and a Neural Network (Multilayer Perceptron) | Anthropometric Physiological Psychological | Height, weight, chest girth Vital capacity, hemoglobin concentration, HR, back strength Eye-hand reaction time | Values in hemoglobin concentration, VC, body height, body weight, chest girth, and dynamic back strength increased over 2 years. The developmental pathways of anthropometric, physiological, and motor performance in elite Chinese athletes are not different from Caucasian athletes |
Four-dimensional | |||||||||
Doherty et al. (2018) [55] | Table tennis Successful elite | Male Total (14) | 15.3 ± 1.2 | 1 year | Observational, prospective | Spearman’s rank-order correlationa | Anthropometric Physiological Technical Psychological | Height, weight, sitting height Sprint Eye-hand coordination Questionnaires: behavioral regulations, work engagement, cognitive emotion regulation, mental toughness, self-regulation of learning self-report | Significant correlations emerged between (a) actual performance rating and age from peak height velocity (r = .71), sprint test (r = − .69), number of years of practice (r = .84), positive refocusing (r = − .58), and self-regulation in learning—self-monitoring (r = − .60), and evaluation (r = .57); (b) performance rating one year later and positive refocusing (r = − .58), self-monitoring (r = − .50), and number of years of practice (r = .80). Results also showed significant correlations between progression scores (2017 rating score minus 2016 rating score) and age from peak height velocity (r = − 0.77), sprint test (r = .63), number of years of practice (r = − .52), self-monitoring (r = .69), and evaluation (r = − .58). Current performance correlated with sprint, training experience, positive refocusing, self-monitoring, and evaluation. Positive refocusing and training experience was able to predict future performance rating. Progression scores correlated with sprint, self-monitoring, and evaluation |