Next Article in Journal
Resilient Health and the Healthcare System. A Few Introductory Remarks in Times of the COVID-19 Pandemic
Next Article in Special Issue
Effects of a Postural Exercise Program on Vertical Jump Height in Young Female Volleyball Players with Knee Valgus
Previous Article in Journal
Biological Mechanisms behind Wischnewsky Spots Finding on Gastric Mucosa: Autopsy Cases and Literature Review
Previous Article in Special Issue
Association between Objectively Measured Sedentary Behaviour and Sleep Quality in Japanese Adults: A Population-Based Cross-Sectional Study
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Body Composition Interactions with Physical Fitness: A Cross-Sectional Study in Youth Soccer Players

by
César Leão
1,2,
Ana Filipa Silva
1,2,3,
Georgian Badicu
4,
Filipe Manuel Clemente
1,2,5,
Roberto Carvutto
6,
Gianpiero Greco
6,
Stefania Cataldi
6,* and
Francesco Fischetti
6
1
Escola Superior Desporto e Lazer, Instituto Politécnico de Viana do Castelo, Rua Escola Industrial e Comercial de Nun’Álvares, 4900-347 Viana do Castelo, Portugal
2
Research Center in Sports Performance, Recreation, Innovation and Technology (SPRINT), 4960-320 Melgaço, Portugal
3
The Research Centre in Sports Sciences, Health Sciences and Human Development (CIDESD), 5001-801 Vila Real, Portugal
4
Department of Physical Education and Special Motricity, Faculty of Physical Education and Mountain Sports, Transilvania University of Braşov, 500068 Braşov, Romania
5
Instituto de Telecomunicações, Delegação da Covilhã, 1049-001 Lisboa, Portugal
6
Department of Basic Medical Sciences, Neuroscience and Sense Organs, University of Study of Bari, 70124 Bari, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19(6), 3598; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19063598
Submission received: 7 February 2022 / Revised: 15 March 2022 / Accepted: 17 March 2022 / Published: 18 March 2022

Abstract

:
This study aimed to: (i) analyze fat mass and physical fitness variations among age-groups and playing positions, and (ii) explore the relationship between fat mass and physical fitness in youth male soccer players. A total of 66 players from under-16, under-17, and under-19 were tested. Body mass, skinfolds, countermovement jump (CMJ), single-leg triple hop jump (SLTH), bilateral triple hop jump (BTH), and yo-yo intermittent recovery Level 2 (YYIR-2) were assessed. A two- and one-way ANOVA were conducted, and the effect size was measured. Interactions were found in skin folds and fat mass. The under-19 group was taller, heavier, with a greater BMI and muscle mass than the under-16 group. They also exceeded the under-16 and under-17 in SLTH, BTH, and YYIRT-2. The under-17 group jumped higher and longer than under-16 group. Goalkeepers were taller and heavier than the midfielders. Central defenders were taller and had more muscle mass than midfielders and were heavier than the midfielders and wingers. The wingers jumped higher than the midfielders and showed better YYIRT-2. BMI was small correlated with YYIRT-2 and moderately with CMJ. Fat mass had a moderate negative correlation with CMJ and YYIRT-2. Muscle mass largely correlated with CMJ, UTH, very large with BTH and moderate with YYIRT-2. Summarily, with increasing age, better performances and body compositions were registered. Muscle mass better influences performance than body fat. Body composition can distinguish players positions.

1. Introduction

To achieve success in soccer, several features including physical characteristics, physiological capacities, as well as motivation and sports-specific knowledge are needed [1,2,3]. Considering that soccer players are normally selected to be included in academies at very young ages, knowing those features and their influencing factors seems to play an important role. Some studies have been conducted that characterize elite players and describe the factors that influence the progression of young soccer players [2,4,5,6]. Nevertheless, in some previous studies, the playing positions were not considered, leading to a potential confounding variable [7]. Indeed, team sports are more complex to analyze than individual sports, where discrete objective measures of performance are more easily observed [8].
During a decade, the anthropometric features of top-level soccer players were analyzed, and it was registered that there was increasing height and body mass among adult professional players (approximately 2 cm and 1.5 kg, respectively) [9]. This could mean that anthropometric characteristics influence performance in this sport. This assumption has already been highlighted, i.e., it was speculated that optimal body composition and greater anthropometric variables could be an advantage since it could help to develop levels of muscle force and power, which leads to a more efficient movement [10,11]. In fact, in the study by Bongiovanni et al. [12], it was noticed that anthropometric features are important predictors of sprint performance and aerobic fitness in a sample of youth elite soccer players. Also, in the Esco et al. [13] study, it was observed that players with a lower fat mass better performed the maximal incremental running test and vertical jump-and-reach task. Those authors added that elevated level of fat tissue together with a lower level of muscle mass may negatively affect physical performance in youth soccer [13].
The literature that focused on young soccer players revealed that child and adolescent players exhibited a significantly lower body fat than the reference population [13,14,15]. Also, body composition registers visible changes during the growth spurt, which occurs in boys around 14 years of age [16]. In addition, Nikolaidis et al. [17] noticed that the age corresponding to U17, seems to determine a turning point in adolescence, in which significant changes in fat mass and fat-free mass were observed [17]. In fact, associations between age and body composition across adolescence were already described, however, no consensus regarding the direction of this association were found, since both increase and decrease of fat mass across adolescence has been reported [17,18,19].
Considering that soccer is characterized as an intermittent activity, with events changing every 3–5 s, it is well understood that players should be prepared for intense actions involving jumps, turns, tackles, high-speed runs, and sprints [20,21,22]. Studies have observed that aerobic fitness, agility, and explosive power in the lower body are important for achieving higher performances [23]. However, considering the changes that occur with growth, and especially with the maturation process, previous research has suggested that different physical performance characteristics become apparent in different age-groups [24,25]. For instance, in the early ages sprinting ability seems to be more crucial (ages between 10 to 14 years; [6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22]), whereas aerobic endurance was found to be more important in older players (15- and 16-year; [6]). These different levels of importance can also be influenced by the development of the players’ body composition.
Considering the above-mentioned knowledge, the purpose of the present study was two-fold: (i) to analyze the variations of fat mass and physical fitness between age-groups and playing positions, and (ii) to investigate the relationship between fat mass and physical fitness in youth male soccer players.

2. Materials and Methods

This study followed an observational design. A total of 87 youth soccer players (age: 16.5 ± 1.1 years; height: 174 ± 0.1 cm; body mass: 66.9 ± 8.3 kg) from under-16 (n = 29), under-17 (n = 28), and under-19 (n = 30) age-groups were included in this study. They were grouped by age-group and by position. The inclusion criteria consisted of (1) all the physical assessments that were performed at the beginning of the season, (2) the absence of injury during the time of the assessments, and the absence of any injury in the previous month before the assessments. After applying the criteria, 66 youth soccer players (age: 16.6 ± 1.1 years; height: 175 ± 0.1 cm; body mass: 66.8 ± 7.9 kg) from under-16 (n = 21), under-17 (n = 19), and under-19 (n = 26) age-groups were included in our analysis. Figure 1 describes the anthropometric characteristics. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Escola Superior de Desporto e Lazer ethical committee with the code CTC-ESDL-CE001-2021.
All the tests were conducted in the first week of training for every age-group in the season 2021–2022 (U19 and U17: 19 to 23 of July; U16: 9–15 August).

2.1. Anthropometry

All the tests were overseen in an appropriate room, just before the participants’ training. All the athletes wore light clothing and stood barefoot. They had their body mass assessed to the nearest 0.1 kg with a digital scale (Prozis SmartScale, Prozis, Madeira, Portugal) and their height measured to the nearest 0.1 cm with a portable stadiometer (Seca 217, Hamburg, Germany). Following the guidelines of the International Society for the Advancement of Kinanthopometry [26], eight skinfolds (triceps, subscapular, biceps, suprailiac, abdominal, supraspinal, thigh, and calf) were measured twice (at 0.1 mm) with a Harpenden caliper (British Indicators, Ltd., London, UK). The mean value of the measurements was considered and the sum of the eight skinfolds was calculated. The equation of Slaughter [27] was applied to estimate body fat. Additionally, the equation of Poortmans [28] was used to estimate the muscle mass. All the measurements were performed by a Level 2 ISAK certified tester. It should be noted that all the athletes were fully mature and involved in the official competition, hence the utilization of these equations.

2.2. Vertical Jumps

After a standardized warm-up period of 5 to 10 min, the athletes carry on 3 repetitions of the countermovement jump (CMJ). They assumed an upright position with the arms locked on the waist throughout the entire motion of the jump. After hearing a signal from the coach, they flexed the knees and jumped, in a single movement, as high as possible. The legs must stay straight, observing plantar flexion. The subjects were instructed to land in the same starting point and to keep the legs straight upon landing, in order to avoid knee bending and the alteration of the measurements. Each subject was given at least 60 s for rest in-between jumps. All the trials were performed by athletes that were positioned on a contact platform (Chronojump) that was attached to hardware (Chronopic®, Chronojump Boscosystem, Barcelona, Spain). The hardware was connected to a computer that displayed the vertical jump values (cm) from a free software (Chronojump Boscosystem Software, Barcelona, Spain). The best of the 3 trials was recorded to the nearest 0.1 cm. All the jumps were performed right before training with the participants wearing sports shoes.

2.3. Horizontal Jumps

An open area was set, and an 8-m measuring tape was put on the floor. A strip was placed perpendicular, creating the starting line. A standardized warm-up was executed by the athletes, after which they proceeded to do 3 trials of each jump, single-leg triple hop jump (SLTH) and bilateral triple hop jump (BTH), with 1 min, at minimum, of rest between the attempts.
To execute the SLTH the athlete would start standing on the designated leg, touching the starting line with his feet. He would then perform 3 consecutive maximal hops. They were instructed to hold the landing foot on the last jump to the place that they landed, although they could use upper extremity movement to keep balance. The distance from the starting line to the point where the subject’s heel landed was registered to the nearest 0.1 cm. After the conclusion of all the trials, the mean result of the 3 jumps for each leg was calculated.
The BTH started with the athlete touching the starting line with one toe that was chosen by the participant. He would then, without balance run, perform a triple jump. They were instructed to hold the landing foot on the last jump to the place that they landed, although they could use upper extremity movement to keep balance. The distance from the starting line to the point where the subject’s heel landed was registered to the nearest 0.1 cm. After the conclusion of all the trials, the mean result of the 3 jumps was calculated.
All the jumps, SLTH and BTH were performed right before training, with the participants wearing sports shoes.

2.4. Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Level 2 (YYIR2)

Following a warm-up period, the participants perform repeated 2 × 20-m runs at progressively increasing speed, intermitted by 10-s periods of active recovery (2 × 5 m) [29]. The test was performed until total exhaustion of the participant was reached (i.e., as maximal performance test). The YYIR2 test started at a higher speed level and two initial runs of 13 and 15 km·h−1, respectively, followed by two runs at 16 km·h−1, three runs at 16.5 km·h−1, 4 runs at 17.0 km·h−1, proceeding with stepwise 0.5 km·h−1 speed increments after every 8 running bouts until exhaustion. The pace was controlled by an automated acoustic device, indicating start, turn, and stop. The test was finalized when the athlete failed to reach the finishing line in time two times or if, due to perceived exhaustion, the test was discontinued.

2.5. Statistical Procedures

Descriptive statistics are presented in the results in the form of the mean and the standard deviation. Exploratory inspection of the -outliers did not reveal significant variations. The Kolmogorov–Smirnov and Levene’s test revealed normality (p > 0.05) and homogeneity (p > 0.05) of the different anthropometry, body composition, and physical fitness outcomes. A two-way ANOVA was used to test the possible interactions between age-group and playing positions. The effect size of the two-way ANOVA was executed using the partial eta squared. A one-way ANOVA was conducted to analyze the variations of outcomes between the age-groups and playing positions. The effect size of the one-way ANOVA was executed using eta squared. The Tukey HSD test was used as post hoc test after the one-way ANOVA, revealing significant differences between the groups. The correlations between body composition and physical fitness outcomes were examined using Pearson’s product-moment correlation test. The magnitude of the correlations was settled based on the following thresholds [30]: 0.0–0.1, trivial; 0.1–0.3, small; 0.3–0.5, moderate; 0.5–0.7, large; 0.7–0.9, very large; and 0.9–1.0, nearly perfect. All the statistical tests were executed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS, version 28.0.0.0., IBM, Boston, IL, USA) for a p < 0.05.

3. Results

Descriptive statistics of anthropometry and body composition outcomes can be found in Figure 2. The two-way ANOVA revealed significant interactions (age-group * playing position) on the sum of skinfolds (p = 0.005; η p 2 = 0.366). No significant interactions (age-group * playing position) were found in fat mass (p = 0.064; η p 2 = 0.270), body mass (p = 0.764; η p 2 = 0.106), height (p = 0.354; η p 2 = 0.176), body mass index (p = 0.308; η p 2 = 0.186), and muscle mass (p = 0.618; η p 2 = 0.130).
Descriptive statistics of physical fitness outcomes can be found in Figure 3. No significant interactions (age-groups * playing positions) were found in CMJ (p = 0.543; η p 2 = 0.143), TH bilateral (p = 0.850; η p 2 = 0.089), TH right leg (p = 0.328; η p 2 = 0.181), TH left leg (p = 0.977; η p 2 = 0.050), and YYIRT (p = 0.270; η p 2 = 0.194).
Descriptive statistics of anthropometry, body composition, and physical fitness outcomes organized per age-group can be found in Table 1. The under-19’s were significantly taller (+0.1 cm; p < 0.001) and heavier (+10.0 kg; p < 0.001) than under-16’s. Significantly greater BMI (+1.3 kg/m2; p = 0.041) and muscle mass (+5.2 kg; p < 0.001) were also found in the under-19’s in comparison to the under-16’s. Regarding the physical fitness outcomes, it was found that the under-19’s jumped significantly higher in CMJ than the under-16’s (+9.4 cm; p < 0.001) and the under-17’s (+5.3 cm; p < 0.001). Moreover, CMJ was also significantly higher in the under-17’s than in the under-16’s (+4.1 cm; p = 0.006). Considering the triple hop bilateral, the under-19 group jumped significantly longer than the under-16 group (+1.1 m; p < 0.001) and under-17 group (+0.5 m; p = 0.003), while the under-17’s jumped significantly longer than the under-16’s (+0.6 m; p < 0.001). Regarding the unilateral triple hop, it was found that the under-19’s jumped significantly longer than the under-16’s in both the right (+0.7 m; p < 0.001) and left (+0.7 m; p < 0.001) legs. Finally, the under-19 group showed a significantly greater YYIRT performance than the under-16’s (+224.1 m; p < 0.001) and the under-17’s (+99.7 m; p = 0.025), while the under-17 group presented significantly greater YYIRT than the under-16’s (+124.4; p = 0.006).
Table 2 presents the descriptive statistics of anthropometry, body composition, and physical fitness outcomes organized by playing position. The goalkeepers were significantly taller than the midfielders (+1 cm; p = 0.011) and wingers (+1 cm; p = 0.024), while the central defenders were significantly taller than the midfielders (+1 cm; p = 0.023). The goalkeepers were significantly heavier than the midfielders (+11.4 kg; p = 0.044), while the central defenders were significantly heavier than the midfielders (+9.8 kg; p = 0.003) and wingers (+9 kg; p = 0.035). The wingers jumped significantly higher than the midfielders (+5.6 cm; p = 0.051). The wingers had significantly better performance at YYIRT than the forwards (+227.3 m; p = 0.033).
The correlation levels between body composition and physical fitness outcomes for the overall players can be observed in Table 3. The body mass index had small magnitude correlations with YYIRT (r = 0.261; p = 0.036) and moderate correlations with CMJ (r = 0.360; p = 0.003). The fat mass had moderate and significant negative correlations with CMJ (r = −0.315; p = 0.011), bilateral TH (r = −0.323; p = 0.009), and left TH (r = −0.260; p = 0.036). The muscle mass had large correlations with bilateral TH (r = 0.547) and moderate correlations with CMJ (r = 0.498; p < 0.001), unilateral TH in right (r = 0.440; p < 0.001), and left (r = 0.439; p < 0.001) legs, and YYIRT (r = 0.498; p < 0.001).

4. Discussion

The current study aimed to explore the variations of body fat mass, muscle mass, and physical fitness between age-groups and playing positions and to investigate the relationship between body composition and physical fitness in youth male soccer players. The main results of our study showed that with increasing age we see a reduction in the percentage of body fat and an increase in the muscle mass, which indicates an improvement in body composition. Moreover, it was found that muscle mass had a greater magnitude of correlations with physical fitness outcomes than body fat mass.
With respect to anthropometric values, our study revealed an increase in the stature and body mass with advancing age, while in the opposite direction we see a decrease in the percentage body fat. In this sense, we see that the characteristics of the participants are within what is found in other studies [4,5,6,17,31,32,33,34] describing the same kind of results. Although the values follow the same pattern in relation to the absolute values, we notice some discrepancy. In some studies we have weight values that are higher than those of our participants in all age groups [4,35,36], while in other studies these values are comparable to ours [8,34] or are even lower [37]. The same is true for height, although we found a greater number of studies reporting a height that was greater than that of our sample [4,33,35,36] compared to an equal [8] or smaller height [37]. With regard to fat mass, we have a greater discrepancy of results, and although it is possible to find samples with similar values [8], in general there is a great variability of values, being possible to find higher values [4,34,36], but also lower values [35,37] than those that were found by our group of researchers.
This discrepancy in values that is found in the literature can be explained by three reasons. First, the genetic profile of the population of origin of the participating athletes, which may influence the physical characteristics of different samples. Second, the different level of play that players are involved in [38]. And finally, the use of different assessment methods or different equations to estimate the percentage of body fat mass could lead to the different values that were found [39].
Considering the physiological specificities of football, it is possible to find differences in anthropometric characteristics in the various positions also [38,40]. When analyzing our results, we concluded that goalkeepers are taller, heavier, and with a higher percentage of body fat and muscle mass compared to the other positions. These results are consistent with what we found in the literature, not only when we think about the group age of our participants [8,31,41,42,43,44,45,46], but also for adult players [47,48,49]. Additionally, and also in line with is found in the literature, we found that the central defenders are the ones with greater stature and greater body mass, despite some homogenization between the field positions. This is mostly in line with what we would expect, due to the general playing demands of the respective positions in the field.
It is well known that body composition, namely the percentage of body fat, has a negative impact on aerobic and anaerobic capacity, strength, power, and speed [2,50,51,52,53], as well as the ability to perform high-intensity and maximum-speed running [54]. Additionally, the effect that physical conditioning has in the ability to jump vertically and in the ability to perform specific tasks quickly is also known [55,56,57,58]. In the same vein, there is some evidence that muscle mass plays a crucial role in improving physical performance [59], even in young soccer players [60].
In that regard, and with the corroboration with what is found in other studies [61,62,63,64], we noticed a negative relationship between the body fat percentage and the results in the tests that were performed by the players. Moreover, and as a more novel finding, we could establish a stronger positive relationship between the results of the tests and total muscle mass.
It is important to note that the decrease in the percentage of body fat that was observed at this age is more a consequence of the gain in muscle mass that is attained by the athletes than the loss of fat mass. We can speculate that the increase in muscle mass could have led to a change in the percentage of body fat mass without decreasing the absolute value of fat mass, something that was already concluded by other researcher [42]. This fact also is in agreement with what was observed by Hannon et al. [36], and, in a way, corroborates the idea that as the player goes through their development process, muscle mass can assume a greater importance relative to body fat regarding their performance in soccer players.
This study had some limitations. To begin with, this study only incorporates a small number of participants. Also, the participants were selected by convenience sampling; thus, findings may be the result of a contextual factor. However, the results that are presented can be supported by previous works, which provide some confidence regarding the generalization. Moreover, no gold-standard method to analyze the body composition was used (e.g., dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry), however skinfolds have good levels of concurrent validity with gold-standard methods which provide confidence about the accuracy of the data. Future research should consider analyzing how muscle mass can enhance physical fitness outcomes and the interactions with the type of training that the players are exposed to. Even so, this study opens the possibilities of new lines of investigation that focus on the variables to be taken into account in the anthropometric monitoring of young soccer athletes in relation to performance.
As a practical implication, this study showed that between the ages of 15 and 18, results in physical tests, as well as body composition, improve in soccer players, with a strong relationship with the increase in muscle mass. Considering this, we can think that muscle mass can be more important to enhance physical fitness in young soccer players in the final stages of their development. Despite that, it is important to note that muscle mass that is gained over the ages must be followed by a correct neural-based training for improving the maximization of contractibility of muscle mass to produce powerful actions.

5. Conclusions

The present study showed that with the increasing age, better physical performances and body compositions were observed in soccer players. Both the muscle mass (positive) and the body fat percentage (negative) influenced that performance, despite the first showing greater influence. The comparison between the players’ position showed that the goalkeepers were taller and heavier than the midfielders, while the central defenders were taller than the midfielders and heavier than midfielders and wingers. The central defenders had more lean body mass than the midfielders. In addition, the wingers jumped higher than the midfielders, and had a better performance at YYIRT than the forwards.
In the future, research should focus on trying to understand the impact of different physical conditioning programs that are applied to young football players on the development of muscle mass and the impact that this will have on their performance in physical tests, and on their chances of having a successful football career.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, C.L. and F.M.C.; methodology, C.L. and G.G.; software, F.M.C.; formal analysis, F.M.C.; investigation, C.L. and A.F.S.; resources, G.B. and S.C.; data curation, C.L.; writing—original draft preparation, C.L., A.F.S., G.B., F.M.C., R.C., G.G., S.C. and F.F.; writing—review and editing, C.L., A.F.S., G.B., F.M.C., R.C., G.G., S.C. and F.F.; visualization, R.C.; supervision, F.M.C., G.G. and F.F.; project administration, R.C. and S.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work is funded by Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia/Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Ensino Superior through national funds and when applicable co-funded EU funds under the project UIDB/50008/2020.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Escola Superior de Desporto e Lazer ethical committee with the code CTC-ESDL-CE001-2021.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all the subjects that were involved in the study prior.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Morris, T. Psychological characteristics and talent identification in soccer. J. Sports Sci. 2000, 18, 715–726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Reilly, T.; Bangsbo, J.; Franks, A.L. Anthropometric and physiological predispositions for elite soccer. J. Sports Sci. 2000, 18, 669–683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Williams, A.M.; Reilly, T. Talent identification and development in soccer. J. Sports Sci. 2000, 18, 657–667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Gil, S.; Ruiz, F.; Irazusta, A.; Gil, J.; Irazusta, J. Selection of young soccer players in terms of anthropometric and physiological factors. J. Sports Med. Phys. Fit. 2007, 47, 25–32. [Google Scholar]
  5. Malina, R.M.; Reyes, M.E.P.; Eisenmann, J.C.; Horta, L.; Rodrigues, J.; Miller, R. Height, mass and skeletal maturity of elite Portuguese soccer players aged 11–16 years. J. Sports Sci. 2000, 18, 685–693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Vaeyens, R.; Malina, R.M.; Janssens, M.; Van Renterghem, B.; Bourgois, J.; Vrijens, J.; Philippaerts, R.M.; Silva, M.J.C. A multidisciplinary selection model for youth soccer: The Ghent Youth Soccer Project. Br. J. Sports Med. 2006, 40, 928–934. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Waldron, M.; Worsfold, P. Differences in the game specific skills of elite and sub-elite youth football players: Implications for talent identification. Int. J. Perform. 2010, 10, 9–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Reilly, T.; Williams, A.M.; Nevill, A.; Franks, A. A multidisciplinary approach to talent identification in soccer. J. Sports Sci. 2000, 18, 695–702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Carling, C.; Le Gall, F.; Malina, R.M. Body size, skeletal maturity, and functional characteristics of elite academy soccer players on entry between 1992 and 2003. J. Sports Sci. 2012, 30, 1683–1693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Lloyd, R.S.; Oliver, J.L.; Radnor, J.M.; Rhodes, B.C.; Faigenbaum, A.D.; Myer, G.D. Relationships between functional movement screen scores, maturation and physical performance in young soccer players. J. Sports Sci. 2015, 33, 11–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Hazir, T. Physical characteristics and somatotype of soccer players according to playing level and position. J. Hum. Kinet. 2010, 26, 83–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Bongiovanni, T.; Trecroci, A.; Cavaggioni, L.; Rossi, A.; Perri, E.; Pasta, G.; Iaia, F.M.; Alberti, G. Importance of anthropometric features to predict physical performance in elite youth soccer: A machine learning approach. Res. Sports Med. 2021, 29, 213–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Esco, M.R.; Fedewa, M.V.; Cicone, Z.S.; Sinelnikov, O.A.; Sekulic, D.; Holmes, C.J. Field-based performance tests are related to body fat percentage and fat-free mass, but not body mass index, in youth soccer players. Sports 2018, 6, 105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Ateş, B. Enhanced Body Composition and Physical Fitness in Prepubescent Soccer Players. Pedagog. Res. 2018, 3, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Rinaldo, N.; Zaccagni, L.; Gualdi-Russo, E. Soccer training programme improved the body composition of pre-adolescent boys and increased their satisfaction with their body image. Acta Paediatr. Int. J. Paediatr. 2016, 105, 492–495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Malina, R.M. Growth and maturity status of young soccer players. In Science and Soccer, 2nd ed.; Reilly, T., Williams, A.M., Eds.; Routledge: Oxfordshire, UK, 2003; pp. 295–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Nikolaidis, P.T.; Karydis, N.V. Physique and body composition in soccer players across adolescence. Asian J. Sports Med. 2011, 2, 75–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Gall, F.L.; Beillot, J.; Rochcongar, P. Évolution de la puissance maximale anaérobie au cours de la croissance chez le footballeur. Sci. Sports 2002, 1597, 177–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Manna, I.; Khanna, G.L.; Dhara, P.C. Effect of training on physiological and biochemical variables of soccer players of different age groups. Asian J. Sports Med. 2010, 1, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Krustrup, P.; Mohr, M.; Steensberg, A.; Bencke, J.; Kjær, M.; Bangsbo, J. Muscle and blood metabolites during a soccer game: Implications for sprint performance. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 2006, 38, 1165–1174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. McInnes, S.E.; Carlson, J.S.; Jones, C.J.; McKenna, M.J. The physiological load imposed on basketball players during competition. J. Sports Sci. 1995, 1, 387–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Mohr, M.; Krustrup, P.; Bangsbo, J. Match performance of high-standard soccer players with special reference to development of fatigue. J. Sports Sci. 2003, 21, 519–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  23. Fiorilli, G.; Mitrotasios, M.; Iuliano, E.; Pistone, E.M.; Aquino, G.; Calcagno, G. Agility and change of direction in soccer: Differences according to the player ages. J. Sports Med. Phys. Fit. 2016, 57, 1597–1604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Vänttinen, T.; Blomqvist, M.; Nyman, K.; Häkkinen, K. Changes in body composition, hormonal status, and physical fitness in 11-, 13-, and 15-year-old Finnish regional youth soccer players during a two-year follow-up. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2011, 25, 3342–3351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Gravina, L.; Gil, S.M.; Ruiz, F.; Zubero, J.; Gil, J.; Irazusta, J. Anthropometric and physiological differences between first team and reserve soccer players aged 10–14 years at the beginning and end of the season. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2008, 22, 1308–1314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Norton, K.I. Standards for anthropometry assessment. In Kinanthropometry and Exercise Physiology, 4th ed.; Norton, K., Eston, R.G., Eds.; Routledge: Oxfordshire, UK, 2019; pp. 68–137. [Google Scholar]
  27. Slaughter, M.; Lohman, T.; Boileau, R.; Horswill, C.; Stillman, R.; van Loan, M.; Bemben, D. Skinfold Equations for Estimation of Body Fatness in Children. Hum. Biol. 1988, 60, 709–723. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  28. Poortmans, J.R.; Boisseau, N.; Moraine, J.; Moreno-reyes, R.; Goldman, S. Estimation of Total-Body Skeletal Muscle Mass in Children and Adolescents. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 2005, 37, 316–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Bangsbo, J.; Iaia, F.M.; Krustrup, P. The Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test. Sports Med. 2008, 38, 37–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Batterham, A.M.; Hopkins, W.G. Making meaningful inferences about magnitudes. Int. J. Perform. 2006, 1, 50–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Lago-Peñas, C.; Rey, E.; Casáis, L.; Gómez-López, M. Relationship between performance characteristics and the selection Process in youth soccer players. J. Hum. Kinet. 2014, 40, 189–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Wittich, A.; Oliveri, M.B.; Rotemberg, E.; Mautalen, C. Body composition of professional football (soccer) players determined by dual X-ray absorptiometry. J. Clin. Densitom. 2001, 4, 51–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Deprez, D.N.; Fransen, J.; Lenoir, M.; Philippaerts, R.M.; Vaeyens, R. A retrospective study on anthropometrical, physical fitness, and motor coordination characteristics that influence dropout, contract status, and first-team playing time in high-level soccer players aged eight to eighteen years. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2015, 29, 1692–1704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. le Gall, F.; Carling, C.; Williams, M.; Reilly, T. Anthropometric and fitness characteristics of international, professional and amateur male graduate soccer players from an elite youth academy. J. Sci. Med. Sport 2010, 13, 90–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Vanderford, M.L.; Meyers, M.C.; Skelly, W.A.; Stewart, C.C.; Hamilton, K.L. Physiological and sport-specific skill response of Olympic youth soccer athletes. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2004, 18, 334–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Hannon, M.P.; Carney, D.J.; Floyd, S.; Parker, L.J.F.; McKeown, J.; Drust, B.; Unnithan, V.B.; Close, G.L.; Morton, J.P. Cross-sectional comparison of body composition and resting metabolic rate in Premier League academy soccer players: Implications for growth and maturation. J. Sports Sci. 2020, 38, 1326–1334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Mendez-Villanueva, A.; Buchheit, M.; Kuitunen, S.; Douglas, A.; Peltola, E.; Bourdon, P.C. Age-related differences in acceleration, maximum running speed, and repeated-sprint performance in young soccer players. J. Sports Sci. 2011, 29, 477–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Di Salvo, V.; Baron, R.; Tschan, H.; Calderon Montero, F.J.; Bachl, N.; Pigozzi, F. Performance characteristics according to playing position in elite soccer. Int. J. Sports Med. 2007, 28, 222–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Leão, C.; Camões, M.; Clemente, F.M.; Nikolaidis, P.T.; Lima, R.; Bezerra, P.; Rosemann, T.; Knechtle, B. Anthropometric profile of soccer players as a determinant of position specificity and methodological issues of body composition estimation. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 2386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Milsom, J.; Naughton, R.; O’Boyle, A.; Iqbal, Z.; Morgans, R.; Drust, B.; Morton, J.P. Body composition assessment of English Premier League soccer players: A comparative DXA analysis of first team, U21 and U18 squads. J. Sports Sci. 2015, 33, 1799–1806. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Árnason, Á.; Sigurdsson, S.B.; Gudmundsson, A.; Holme, I.; Engebretsen, L.; Bahr, R. Physical fitness, injuries, and team performance in soccer. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 2004, 36, 278–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Silvestre, R.; West, C.; Maresh, C.M.; Kraemer, W.J. Body composition and physical performance in men’s soccer: A Study of a National Collegiate Athletic Association Division I team. J. Strength Cond. 2006, 20, 177–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Tahara, Y.; Moji, K.; Tsunawake, N.; Fukuda, R.; Nakayama, M.; Nakagaichi, M.; Komine, T.; Kusano, Y.; Aoyagi, K. Physique, body composition and maximum oxygen consumption of selected soccer players of Kunimi High School, Nagasaki, Japan. J. Physiol. Anthropol. 2006, 25, 291–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  44. Gil, S.M.; Gil, J.; Ruiz, F.; Irazusta, A.; Irazusta, J. Physiological and Anthropometric characteristics of young soccer players according to their playing position: Relevance for the selection process. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2007, 21, 438–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Rebelo, A.; Brito, J.; Maia, J.; Coelho-E-Silva, M.J.; Figueiredo, A.J.; Bangsbo, J.; Malina, R.M.; Seabra, A. Anthropometric characteristics, physical fitness and technical performance of under-19 soccer players by competitive level and field position. Int. J. Sports Med. 2013, 34, 312–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  46. Abdullah, M.R.; Musa, R.M.; Maliki, A.B.H.M.; Suppiah, P.K.; Kosni, N.A. Relationship of physical characteristics, mastery and readiness to perform with position of elite soccer players. Int. J. Adv. Eng. Res. Stud. 2016, 1, 8–11. [Google Scholar]
  47. Sutton, L.; Scott, M.; Wallace, J.; Reilly, T. Body composition of English Premier League soccer players: Influence of playing position, international status, and ethnicity. J. Sports Sci. 2009, 27, 1019–1026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Sporis, G.; Jukic, I.; Ostojic, S.M.; Milanovic, D. Fitness profiling in soccer: Physical and physiologic characteristics of elite players. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2009, 23, 1947–1953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Carling, C.; Orhant, E. Variation in body composition in professional soccer players: Interseasonal and intraseasonal changes and the effects of exposure time and player position. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2010, 24, 1332–1339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Hogstrom, G.; Pietila, T.; Nordstrom, P.; Nordstrom, A. Body composition and performance: Influence of sport and gender among adolescents. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2012, 26, 1799–1804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Nikolaidis, P.T.; Ruano, M.G.; De Oliveira, N.C.; Portes, L.A.; Freiwald, J.; Leprêtre, P.M.; Knechtle, B. Who runs the fastest? Anthropometric and physiological correlates of 20 m sprint performance in male soccer players. Res. Sports Med. 2016, 24, 341–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Toselli, S.; Campa, F.; Maietta Latessa, P.; Greco, G.; Loi, A.; Grigoletto, A.; Zaccagni, L. Differences in maturity and anthropometric and morphological characteristics among young male basketball and soccer players and non-players. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 3902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Toselli, S.; Campa, F. Anthropometry and functional movement patterns in elite male volleyball players of different competitive levels. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2018, 32, 2601–2611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Radzimiński, Ł.; Szwarc, A.; Padrón-Cabo, A.; Jastrzębski, Z. Correlations between body composition, aerobic capacity, speed and distance covered among professional soccer players during official matches. J. Sports Med. Phys. Fit. 2020, 60, 257–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Copic, N.; Dopsaj, M.; Ivanovic, J.; Nesic, G.; Jaric, S. Body composition and muscle strength predictors of jumping performance: Differences between elite female volleyball competitors and nontrained individuals. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2014, 28, 2709–2716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Malina, R.M. Body composition in athletes: Assessment and estimated fatness. Clin. Sports Med. 2007, 26, 37–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Greco, G.; Messina, G.; Angiulli, A.; Patti, A.; Iovane, A.; Fischetti, F. A preliminary comparative study on the effects of pilates training on physical fitness of young female volleyball players. Acta Med. Mediterr. 2019, 35, 783–789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Fischetti, F.; Cataldi, S.; Greco, G. Lower-limb plyometric training improves vertical jump and agility abilities in adult female soccer players. J. Phys. Educ. Sport. 2019, 19, 1254–1261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Wong, P.L.; Chamari, K.; Dellal, A.; Wisloff, U. Relationship between anthropometric and physiological Characteristics in youth soccer players. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2009, 23, 1204–1210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Akdoğan, E.; Olgun, S. Relationship between body composition, Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test and vertical jump test in elite young soccer players. Turk. J. Sports Med. 2021, 56, 186–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Pérez-Contreras, J.; Merino-Muñoz, P.; Aedo-Muñoz, E. Vínculo entre composición corporal, sprint y salto vertical en futbolistas jóvenes de élite de Chile. MHSalud Rev. Cienc. Mov. Hum. Salud 2021, 18, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Gameiro, P.; Familia, C.; Granja, S.; Caetano, C.; Ferreira, D.; Godinho, C. Relationship between body composition, sprint performance and vertical jump tests in young elite soccer players. Ann. Med. 2018, 18, S168–S169. [Google Scholar]
  63. Atakan, M.M.; Unver, E.; Demirci, N. Effect of body composition on fitness performance in young male football players. Turk. J. Sports Med. 2017, 19, 54–59. [Google Scholar]
  64. Mathisen, G.; Pettersen, S.A. Anthropometric factors related to sprint and agility performance in young male soccer players. Open Access J. Sports Med. 2015, 6, 337–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Figure 1. Characteristics of the observed population. (a) All athletes: U-16 (n = 29), U-17 (n = 28), and U-19 (n = 30). (b) Athletes included in the analysis: U-16 (n = 21), U-17 (n = 19), and U-19 (n = 26).
Figure 1. Characteristics of the observed population. (a) All athletes: U-16 (n = 29), U-17 (n = 28), and U-19 (n = 30). (b) Athletes included in the analysis: U-16 (n = 21), U-17 (n = 19), and U-19 (n = 26).
Ijerph 19 03598 g001
Figure 2. Descriptive statistics (mean ± standard deviation) of (a) height, (b) body mass, (c) body mass index, (d) sum of skinfolds, (e) fat mass, and (f) muscle mass for each age-group and playing position. GK—goalkeeper; ED—external defender; CD—central defender; MF—midfielder; W—winger; FW—Forward.
Figure 2. Descriptive statistics (mean ± standard deviation) of (a) height, (b) body mass, (c) body mass index, (d) sum of skinfolds, (e) fat mass, and (f) muscle mass for each age-group and playing position. GK—goalkeeper; ED—external defender; CD—central defender; MF—midfielder; W—winger; FW—Forward.
Ijerph 19 03598 g002
Figure 3. Descriptive statistics (mean ± standard deviation) of (a) CMJ, (b) triple hop bilateral, (c) triple hop left, (d) triple hop right, (e) yo-yo intermittent recovery test—level 2. GK—goalkeeper; ED—external defender; CD—central defender; MF—midfielder; W—winger; FW—Forward.
Figure 3. Descriptive statistics (mean ± standard deviation) of (a) CMJ, (b) triple hop bilateral, (c) triple hop left, (d) triple hop right, (e) yo-yo intermittent recovery test—level 2. GK—goalkeeper; ED—external defender; CD—central defender; MF—midfielder; W—winger; FW—Forward.
Ijerph 19 03598 g003
Table 1. Descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation) of anthropometry, body composition, and physical fitness outcomes organized per age-group.
Table 1. Descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation) of anthropometry, body composition, and physical fitness outcomes organized per age-group.
Under-16 (n = 21)Under-17 (n = 18)Under-19 (n = 26)pEffect Size η 2
Height (cm)169.8 ± 6.1174.6 ± 4.6178.5 ± 7.0<0.001 **0.271
BM (kg)61.6 ± 8.066.0 ± 5.771.6 ± 6.3<0.001 **0.297
BMI (kg/m2)21.3 ± 1.921.7 ± 1.722.5 ± 1.40.044 *0.096
Skinfolds (mm)75.8 ± 23.873.4 ± 24.267.7 ± 13.00.3800.031
Fat mass (%)13.2 ± 3.912.6 ± 3.212.0 ± 2.50.4310.027
Muscle mass (kg)24.5 ± 3.426.4 ± 2.929.7 ± 2.2<0.001 **0.401
CMJ (cm)30.8 ± 3.634.9 ± 3.140.2 ± 4.9<0.001 **0.507
TH bilateral (m)6.3 ± 0.56.9 ± 0.47.4 ± 0.4<0.001 **0.540
TH right leg (m)6.0 ± 0.56.1 ± 0.56.7 ± 0.4<0.001 **0.395
TH left leg (m)6.0 ± 0.56.2 ± 0.46.7 ± 0.6<0.001 **0.272
YYIRT (m)266.7 ± 98.3391.1 ± 72.0490.8 ± 158.6<0.001 **0.391
BM: body mass; BMI: body mass index; CMJ: countermovement jump; TH: triple hop; YYIRT: Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test—level 2; * significant at p < 0.05; ** significant at p < 0.01.
Table 2. Descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation) of anthropometry, body composition, and physical fitness outcomes organized by playing position.
Table 2. Descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation) of anthropometry, body composition, and physical fitness outcomes organized by playing position.
GK (n = 4)ED (n = 8)CD (n = 12)MF (n = 24)WG (n = 11)FW (n = 6)pEffect Size η 2
Height (cm)184.0 ± 8.3175.1 ± 7.3179.3 ± 6.0172.0 ± 6.8172.1 ± 3.9173.3 ± 5.60.002 **0.266
BM (kg)74.7 ± 7.968.0 ± 5.973.1 ± 6.963.3 ± 7.564.1 ± 6.366.5 ± 7.00.001 **0.277
BMI (kg/m2)22.0 ± 1.422.2 ± 2.022.8 ± 1.521.3 ± 1.521.6 ± 1.822.1 ± 2.00.2770.099
Skinfolds (mm)73.7 ± 12.980.3 ± 32.078.8 ± 24.770.4 ± 16.061.0 ± 13.571.8 ± 18.50.3030.095
Fat mass (%)11.3 ± 2.212.5 ± 3.314.4 ± 4.312.2 ± 2.912.1 ± 2.812.4 ± 2.30.4130.080
Muscle mass (kg)27.7 ± 1.228.4 ± 3.329.0 ± 2.725.7 ± 3.727.7 ± 4.025.9 ± 3.40.0950.144
CMJ (cm)40.4 ± 7.138.2 ± 4.933.7 ± 4.133.7 ± 4.539.3 ± 6.734.3 ± 6.40.014 *0.211
TH bilateral (m)7.1 ± 0.97.2 ± 0.76.9 ± 0.66.8 ± 0.77.2 ± 0.46.6 ± 0.50.3040.095
TH right leg (m)6.6 ± 0.56.3 ± 0.46.3 ± 0.56.2 ± 0.66.6 ± 0.56.0 ± 0.50.2500.104
TH left leg (m)6.6 ± 0.66.4 ± 0.76.3 ± 0.66.2 ± 0.66.5 ± 0.56.1 ± 0.50.5370.065
YYIRT (m)280.0 ± 56.6380.0 ± 126.5416.7 ± 129.3388.3 ± 173.5487.3 ± 136.0260.0 ± 97.20.039 *0.176
GK: goalkeeper; ED: external defender; CD: central defender; MF: midfielder; WG: winger; FW: central forward/striker; BM: body mass; BMI: body mass index; CMJ: countermovement jump; TH: triple hop; YYIRT: Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test—level 2; * significant at p < 0.05; ** significant at p < 0.01.
Table 3. Pearson correlation coefficient (correlation coefficient; (95%confidence interval, minimum; maximum)) between body composition and physical fitness outcomes.
Table 3. Pearson correlation coefficient (correlation coefficient; (95%confidence interval, minimum; maximum)) between body composition and physical fitness outcomes.
CMJ (cm)TH Bilateral (m)TH Right Leg (m)TH Left Leg (m)YYIRT (m)
BMI (kg/m2)0.360 **
(0.128; 0.555)
0.194
(−0.053; 0.418)
0.202
(−0.044; 0.425)
0.190
(−0.056; 0.415)
0.261 *
(0.018; 0.475)
Fat mass (%)−0.315 *
(−0.519; −0.077)
–0.323 **
(−0.526; −0.086)
–0.151
(−0.381; 0.096)
−0.260 *
(−0.474; −0.018)
−0.240
(−0.457; 0.004)
Muscle mass (kg)0.573 *
(0.382; 0.717)
0.547 **
(0.350; 0.698)
0.440 **
(0.220; 0.618)
0.439 **
(0.219; 0.617)
0.498 **
(0.289; 0.661)
BMI: body mass index; CMJ: countermovement jump; TH: triple hop; YYIRT: Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test—level 2; * significant at p < 0.05; ** significant at p < 0.01.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Leão, C.; Silva, A.F.; Badicu, G.; Clemente, F.M.; Carvutto, R.; Greco, G.; Cataldi, S.; Fischetti, F. Body Composition Interactions with Physical Fitness: A Cross-Sectional Study in Youth Soccer Players. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 3598. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19063598

AMA Style

Leão C, Silva AF, Badicu G, Clemente FM, Carvutto R, Greco G, Cataldi S, Fischetti F. Body Composition Interactions with Physical Fitness: A Cross-Sectional Study in Youth Soccer Players. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(6):3598. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19063598

Chicago/Turabian Style

Leão, César, Ana Filipa Silva, Georgian Badicu, Filipe Manuel Clemente, Roberto Carvutto, Gianpiero Greco, Stefania Cataldi, and Francesco Fischetti. 2022. "Body Composition Interactions with Physical Fitness: A Cross-Sectional Study in Youth Soccer Players" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, no. 6: 3598. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19063598

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop