Defining a research agenda for youth sport specialisation in the USA: The AMSSM Youth Early Sport Specialization Summit

Sport specialisation is becoming increasingly common among youth and adolescent athletes in the USA and many have raised concern about this trend. Although research on sport specialisation has grown significantly, numerous pressing questions remain pertaining to short-term and long-term effects of specialisation on the health and well-being of youth, including the increased risk of overuse injury and burnout. Many current elite athletes did not specialise at an early age. Methodological and study design limitations impact the quality of current literature, and researchers need to prioritise pressing research questions to promote safe and healthy youth sport participation. The American Medical Society for Sports Medicine hosted a Youth Early Sport Specialization Summit in April 2019 with the goal of synthesising and reviewing current scientific knowledge and developing a research agenda to guide future research in the field based on the identified gaps in knowledge. This statement provides a broad summary of the existing literature, gaps and limitations in current evidence and identifies key research priorities to help guide researchers conducting research on youth sport specialisation. Our goals are to help improve the quality and relevance of research on youth sport specialisation and to ultimately assure that opportunities for healthy and safe sport participation continue for all youth

Defining a Research Agenda for Youth Sport Specialization in the United States: The AMSSM Youth Early Sport Specialization Summit

Sport specialization is becoming increasingly common among youth and adolescent athletes in the United States and many have raised concern about this trend. Although research on sport specialization has grown significantly, numerous pressing questions remain pertaining to short- and long-term effects of specialization on the health and well-being of youth, including the increased risk of overuse injury and burnout. Many current elite athletes did not specialize at an early age. Methodological and study design limitations impact the quality of current literature, and researchers need to prioritize pressing research questions to promote safe and healthy youth sport participation. The American Medical Society for Sports Medicine hosted a Youth Early Sport Specialization Summit in April 2019 with the goal of synthesizing and reviewing current scientific knowledge and developing a research agenda to guide future research in the field based on the identified gaps in knowledge. This statement provides a broad summary of the existing literature, gaps and limitations in current evidence, and identifies key research priorities to help guide researchers conducting research on youth sport specialization. Our goals are to help improve the quality and relevance of research on youth sport specialization and to ultimately assure that opportunities for healthy and safe sport participation continue for all youth

Impact of youth sports specialisation on career and task-specific athletic performance: A systematic review following the American Medical Society for Sports Medicine (AMSSM) Collaborative Research Network's 2019 Youth Early Sport Specialisation Summit

Objective The impact, positive or negative, of youth sport specialisation (YSS) on short-Term and long-Term performance is not fully understood; however, the desire to maximise performance goals is generally considered the primary reason children and adolescents specialise at a young age. We performed a systematic review of original research to establish the association of YSS and task-focused or career-focused performance outcomes. Design Systematic review. Data sources Databases searched include PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, CINAHL and SPORTDiscus. Eligibility criteria We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to identify peer-reviewed research articles published in English between 1 January 1990 and 31 December 2018 that reported original findings on the association of YSS and performance outcomes. Studies without an explicit measure of sport specialisation, for example, volume measures without measuring sport specialisation, were excluded. Results Twenty-Two articles were included in the final review; 15 addressed career performance outcomes and 7 considered task performance outcomes. All identified studies were cross-sectional or retrospective in design. The proportion of elite athletes who specialised early ranged between 7% and 85%, depending on sport and definition of specialisation. Elite athletes often specialised between the ages of 14 and 15 compared with their non-elite or semi-elite peers who typically specialised prior to 13 years. In addition, neuromuscular control, anterior reach asymmetry and physical task outcomes did not differ by specialisation status. Conclusion The volume and methodological rigour of published research in this field are limited. Our review suggests that YSS is not required to achieve success at elite levels. YSS also does not appear to improve task-related performance (eg, anterior reach, neuromuscular control) outcomes for specialised athletes when compared with non-specialised athletes during childhood and adolescence

Systematic Review of Health Organization Guidelines Following the AMSSM 2019 Youth Early Sport Specialization Summit

Context: Youth sport specialization may place young athletes at increased risk for negative impacts to their physical and/or psychological health. In response to these health concerns, several health organizations have created guidelines and position statements to guide parents and practitioners toward best practices for management of the young athlete. Objective: To systematically review and synthesize current organizations’ recommendations and guidelines regarding youth sport specialization. Data Sources: English-language articles from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2018, in the NCBI Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane, CINAHL, and SPORTDiscus databases. Study Selection: Articles that reported on recommendations or interventions by health organizations or health representatives of sports organizations. A total of 56 articles were assessed, with 11 meeting inclusion eligibility criteria. Study Design: Systematic review. Level of Evidence: Level 4. Data Extraction: Two investigators independently identified all recommendations within the results that fit within a 15-item framework encompassing 4 domains: Psychological Development/Approach, Physical Development/Load, Facilities and Resources, and Timing and Monitoring of Specialization. Results: Recommendations across organizations were primarily clustered in the Physical Development/Load (43%), Facilities and Resources (48%), and Sport Specialization (55%) domains. In contrast, the Psychological Development/Approach domain had fewer recommendations (20%). The most common recommendations endorsed concepts: “Monitor athlete well-being,” “Youth athletes need access to well-trained, quality coaches,” “Multi-sport participation,” “Limit early organized participation and/or training,” and “Parents require awareness of training, coaching, and best practices.” The level of evidence provided to support a given recommendation varied significantly. The level of detail and the consistency of terms used throughout the results were typically low. Recommendations were frequently made without reference to potential outcome measures or specific strategies that could be used for practical implementation in the community. Conclusion: There was broad representation of different aspects of specialization but limited consistency between health organization guidelines. Adopting a framework for recommendations as used in this review could assist organizations in structuring future recommendations that are specific, measurable, and framed in a manner that will promote action in the youth sport community

The human microbiota is associated with cardiometabolic risk across the epidemiologic transition.

Oral and fecal microbial biomarkers have previously been associated with cardiometabolic (CM) risk, however, no comprehensive attempt has been made to explore this association in minority populations or across different geographic regions. We characterized gut- and oral-associated microbiota and CM risk in 655 participants of African-origin, aged 25-45, from Ghana, South Africa, Jamaica, and the United States (US). CM risk was classified using the CM risk cut-points for elevated waist circumference, elevated blood pressure and elevated fasted blood glucose, low high-density lipoprotein (HDL), and elevated triglycerides. Gut-associated bacterial alpha diversity negatively correlated with elevated blood pressure and elevated fasted blood glucose. Similarly, gut bacterial beta diversity was also significantly differentiated by waist circumference, blood pressure, triglyceridemia and HDL-cholesterolemia. Notably, differences in inter- and intra-personal gut microbial diversity were geographic-region specific. Participants meeting the cut-points for 3 out of the 5 CM risk factors were significantly more enriched with Lachnospiraceae, and were significantly depleted of Clostridiaceae, Peptostreptococcaceae, and Prevotella. The predicted relative proportions of the genes involved in the pathways for lipopolysaccharides (LPS) and butyrate synthesis were also significantly differentiated by the CM risk phenotype, whereby genes involved in the butyrate synthesis via lysine, glutarate and 4-aminobutyrate/succinate pathways and LPS synthesis pathway were enriched in participants with greater CM risk. Furthermore, inter-individual oral microbiota diversity was also significantly associated with the CM risk factors, and oral-associated Streptococcus, Prevotella, and Veillonella were enriched in participants with 3 out of the 5 CM risk factors. We demonstrate that in a diverse cohort of African-origin adults, CM risk is significantly associated with reduced microbial diversity, and the enrichment of specific bacterial taxa and predicted functional traits in both gut and oral environments. As well as providing new insights into the associations between the gut and oral microbiota and CM risk, this study also highlights the potential for novel therapeutic discoveries which target the oral and gut microbiota in CM risk

Surveillance testing for SARS-COV-2 infection in an asymptomatic athlete population: A prospective cohort study with 123 362 tests and 23 463 paired RT-PCR/antigen samples

Objective To assess the diagnostic accuracy of antigen compared with reverse transcriptase (RT)-PCR testing in an asymptomatic athlete screening programme and to monitor infection in college athletes. Methods Quidel Sofia-2 SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Tests were performed daily before sports participation for football, basketball, wrestling and water polo from 29 September 2020 to 28 February 2021. Paired RT-PCR and antigen tests were performed at least once a week. Positive antigen tests were confirmed with RT-PCR. Results 81 175 antigen and 42 187 RT-PCR tests were performed, including 23 462 weekly paired antigen/RT-PCR screening tests in 1931 athletes. One hundred and seventy-two athletes had a positive screening RT-PCR (0.4%), of which 83 (48%) occurred on paired testing days. The sensitivity of antigen tests varied with the frequency of RT-PCR testing and prevalence of COVID-19. The sensitivity of antigen testing was 35.7% (95% CI: 17% to 60%) and specificity 99.8% (95% CI: 99.7% to 99.9%) with once-a-week RT-PCR testing after adjusting for school prevalence. Daily antigen testing was similar to RT-PCR testing two to three times a week in identifying infection. Antigen testing identified infection before the next scheduled PCR on 89 occasions and resulted in 234 days where potentially infectious athletes were isolated before they would have been isolated with RT-PCR testing alone. Two athletic-related outbreaks occurred; 86% of total infections were community acquired. Conclusion Antigen testing has high specificity with a short turnaround time but is not as sensitive as RT-PCR. Daily antigen testing or RT-PCR testing two to three times a week is similar. There are benefits and drawbacks to each testing approach. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.Open access journalThis item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at [email protected]