Youth and adolescent athletes: training, injury and development
Training young athletes means training a moving target: bodies that are growing, maturing and specialising at different rates. This guide starts where the field agrees, the international consensus on youth athletic development, the position statement on youth resistance training, and the consensus on paediatric ACL injuries, which together push back on the myth that strength training stunts growth and set out how to load young athletes safely. It then layers on the individual studies we have appraised, from injury-prevention programmes to early specialisation. Along the way it defines the key terms and answers the questions clinicians and coaches ask most. Where the evidence is thin, particularly in the youngest age groups, we say so.
Updated as new evidence lands · last reviewed at Issue 9
Foundations: consensus & guidelines
The international consensus statements this topic is built on. Start here, then read the appraised studies below against them.
Global guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour across the lifespan and clinical populations.
- Adults should do 150 to 300 minutes of moderate, or 75 to 150 minutes of vigorous, aerobic activity per week, plus muscle strengthening on two or more days.
- Some physical activity is better than none, and any amount counts toward health benefits; sedentary time should be limited.
- Recommendations extend across the lifespan and to pregnancy, older adults and people with chronic conditions or disability.
Our appraisal: A GRADE-informed guideline from a large evidence review, so the dose targets are among the better-grounded numbers in this field. Its limitation is deliberate breadth: it sets population activity doses, not sport-specific training prescriptions, and stops short of a firm sedentary-time threshold.
Read the statement ↗IOC consensus standardising how injury and illness are defined, recorded and reported in sport, and introducing the STROBE Extension for Sport Injury and Illness Surveillance.
- Standardises definitions for injury and illness, their severity, and how athlete exposure is captured and reported.
- Introduces the STROBE Extension for Sport Injury and Illness Surveillance (STROBE-SIIS) as a reporting guideline.
- Recommends expressing risk as incidence and burden, that is severity combined with incidence, rather than injury counts alone.
Our appraisal: This is a methods consensus, not a clinical recommendation; its value is making injury and illness data comparable across studies and squads. It does not tell you how to prevent injury, but it defines the denominator and outcomes against which any prevention claim should be judged.
Read the statement ↗International consensus on the prevention, diagnosis and management of anterior cruciate ligament injuries in skeletally immature patients.
- Stresses that management in growing children must protect open growth plates and be individualised with the family.
- Prioritises timely diagnosis, specialist involvement and shared decision-making over a one-size-fits-all surgical rule.
- Highlights neuromuscular training as the mainstay of prevention in youth.
Our appraisal: Expert consensus addressing questions where randomised evidence in children is scarce; it frames a cautious, individualised approach rather than resolving graft or timing debates. Weight it as the best available structured guidance for a population that trials rarely study.
Read the statement ↗IOC consensus on how training and competition load relate to injury and illness risk, and how to monitor it.
- Load itself is not the enemy; appropriate, progressive load builds the capacity that protects athletes, whereas rapid changes relative to what an athlete is accustomed to are associated with raised injury risk.
- Recommends monitoring both external load, what the athlete does, and internal load, the physiological and psychological response, alongside athlete wellbeing.
- Presents the acute:chronic workload ratio as one monitoring concept, flagging rapid load increases as higher risk, and stresses individualised load progression.
- Notes that many modifiers, including sleep, psychological stress and previous injury, shape the relationship between load and injury.
Our appraisal: Structured expert consensus rather than a trial, so it frames how to think about load rather than proving any threshold. Note that the acute:chronic workload ratio it helped popularise has since been heavily criticised on methodological grounds, including spurious correlation, arbitrary cut-offs and uncertain modelling, so treat specific ratios as a prompt for discussion, not a rule.
Read the statement ↗International consensus on developing healthy, resilient and capable young athletes, covering maturation, training, specialisation and wellbeing.
- Emphasises that training and expectations should track biological maturation, not just chronological age.
- Cautions against early single-sport specialisation for most youth, citing overuse injury and burnout risk.
- Frames long-term athletic development around enjoyment, diverse movement and appropriate progressive loading.
Our appraisal: Consensus synthesis of expert opinion and observational evidence; it sets sound developmental principles rather than prescribing validated dose thresholds. It is most useful as a framework for age- and maturity-appropriate planning.
Read the statement ↗IOC consensus recommending a structured periodic health evaluation for elite athletes, covering cardiovascular, musculoskeletal, general and mental health.
- Recommends a structured, periodic health evaluation rather than a single one-off pre-participation examination.
- Covers cardiovascular screening, musculoskeletal assessment, and general and mental health.
- Positions the evaluation as a chance to educate athletes and establish baselines, while acknowledging limited evidence that screening prevents outcomes.
Our appraisal: Expert consensus from 2009, so both the evidence and some recommendations, particularly around cardiac screening, have moved on and remain debated. It is useful as a template for what a periodic health review can cover, but it is not evidence that screening changes injury or illness outcomes.
Read the statement ↗National Strength and Conditioning Association position statement on the safety, benefits and prescription of resistance training for children and adolescents.
- Concludes that supervised, appropriately prescribed resistance training is safe and effective for children and adolescents.
- Finds no evidence that resistance training damages growth plates or stunts growth when technique and progression are sound.
- Recommends qualified supervision, correct technique and gradual progression as the conditions for safe training.
Our appraisal: A position statement drawing on a broad literature review; it settled the growth-plate myth and remains a practical reference, though it predates some newer long-term athletic development work. It tells you youth lifting is safe and beneficial when coached well, not the optimal programme for a given child.
Read the statement ↗The evidence, appraised
Individual studies we have appraised, read against the consensus above, newest first.
Key terms in this topic
Frequently asked
Is resistance training safe for children?
Yes. The NSCA position statement concludes that supervised, well-designed resistance training is safe and beneficial for children and adolescents, and that it does not damage growth plates when technique and progression are appropriate. The old fear that lifting stunts growth is not supported by the evidence. Competent supervision, appropriate loads and sound technique are the conditions that make it safe.
Does early sport specialisation improve long-term success?
The IOC youth development consensus cautions against early single-sport specialisation for most young athletes, linking it to higher rates of overuse injury and burnout without reliable long-term performance gains. Diverse, multi-sport participation is generally favoured through childhood. This is expert consensus drawing on observational evidence, so it is a well-reasoned steer rather than proof.
How are paediatric ACL injuries managed differently from adults?
The 2018 IOC paediatric ACL consensus highlights that skeletally immature patients need surgical techniques and decisions that respect open growth plates, and that management should be individualised with families involved in shared decisions. It stresses prevention, timely diagnosis and specialist involvement. As with other consensus statements, it frames the approach rather than settling every technical question.
Can injury-prevention programmes reduce injuries in young athletes?
Neuromuscular training programmes that combine strength, balance and landing technique, such as FIFA 11+, reduce injury rates in youth sport, and consensus supports their use. The effect varies with how well and how consistently programmes are delivered, and adherence is the main practical barrier. They lower risk; they do not eliminate it.
Should training load follow biological maturity rather than age?
Consensus favours accounting for biological maturity, not just chronological age, because children of the same age can differ markedly in development. This matters for grouping, load and expectations. The principle is well supported in consensus; the practical tools for measuring maturity in everyday settings remain imperfect.
The five papers that matter, every week, free.
We read the whole sports-medicine, rehab & performance literature and appraise the papers worth your time.
Get the free weekly issue