Effects of Age and Playing Position on Field-Based Physical Fitness Measures in Adolescent Female Netball Players
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This cross-sectional study investigated the impact of age and playing position, controlling for maturity, on physical fitness indicators in 303 adolescent female netball players aged 12.0 to 15.9 years. Assessments included estimated maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max) via the 20 m shuttle run test, 10 m and 20 m sprints, change of direction speed (CODS) using the 505 test, and muscle power via the medicine ball chest throw (MBCT) and countermovement vertical jump (CMJ). Participants were grouped by age (12 to 15 years) and playing position (non-circle and circle players), with age at peak height velocity as a covariate for maturity. Results revealed that, at 15 years, CMJ height was greater than at 12 years and 13 years (p < 0.05, partial η2 = 0.048). MBCT distance increased across age groups (p < 0.01, partial η2 = 0.323). Age had no impact on sprints, VO2max, or CODS. Non-circle players outperformed circle players in the 10 m sprint (p = 0.042, partial η2 = 0.016) and 20 m sprints (p = 0.010, partial η2 = 0.025) and displayed higher VO2max (p < 0.001, partial η2 = 0.036). Circle players were taller (p = 0.046, partial η2 = 0.014) and heavier (p < 0.001, partial η2 = 0.040) than non-circle players. Playing positions showed no differences in CMJ and MBCT. In adolescent female netball players, only muscle power is influenced by age, while non-circle players exhibit superior aerobic fitness and speed compared to circle players. Coaches may be able to utilize the distinct age and playing position traits of adolescent netballers to inform player selection and design targeted training programs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".