Skip to publication summary
Peer-reviewed journal article · 2013 · Gymnastics & child development

Assessment of the physical development of pre-school and primary school children practising artistic gymnastics

Stefan Kolimechkov · Lubomir Petrov · Bogdana Ilinova · Albena Alexandrova · Luba Andreeva · Petar Atanasov

Journal of Sport Science (‘Спорт и Наука’), issue 4, 106–115 · Originally published in Bulgarian

40young artistic gymnasts assessed in Sofia
4–12years of age across the study sample
22 + 18boys and girls included, respectively
Body + gripanthropometry, body composition and hand strength
STK SPORT research summary graphic illustrating physical development assessment in young artistic gymnasts, including height, BMI, skinfold and handgrip measurements
A visual summary of the physical-development measures used in the study. It is an STK SPORT editorial illustration, not a figure reproduced from the journal paper.

Looking beyond BMI in young athletes.

Physical-development assessment can help coaches adapt training to the individual child. Height, body mass and BMI are accessible measures, but BMI cannot distinguish fat mass from muscle mass. That distinction may be particularly important in sports such as artistic gymnastics, where athletes repeatedly support and move their own body weight.

This study examined whether accessible anthropometric and strength measures could provide a more informative assessment of pre-school and primary-school children practising gymnastics.

When BMI suggests that a young gymnast is overweight, do body-fat and strength measures provide important additional context?
What the researchers did

One assessment combining growth, body composition and strength.

The researchers assessed 40 children attending artistic-gymnastics classes at Sports Centre Levski in Sofia, Bulgaria.

This was a cross-sectional assessment rather than a training intervention. The measurements describe the children at the time of testing.

01 · Participants

Young artistic gymnasts

The overall sample comprised 22 boys and 18 girls aged 4–12 years. Children were considered by school-age group and, for an experience-based comparison, by gymnastics experience.

02 · Anthropometry

Growth and body composition

Height, body mass, BMI, upper-arm circumference and two skinfolds were measured. WHO software provided age-related Z-scores and percentiles; skinfolds were used to estimate body-fat percentage and upper-arm muscle area.

03 · Strength

Left and right handgrip

Maximal isometric grip strength was measured for both hands using three attempts with a child handgrip dynamometer. The analysis included analysis of variance and Student’s t-test.

What the study found

BMI did not tell the whole story.

Body-fat estimates and upper-arm muscle area helped distinguish between children who shared a similar BMI classification but had different body-composition profiles.

BMI classification

Seven children were above +1 Z-score

Seven participants had BMI-for-age Z-scores between +1 and +2. Figure 1 reported no children below −2 or above +2.

Body-composition context

The same BMI range did not mean the same thing

Two more-experienced boys in the seven-child group had estimated body-fat values of 11.7% and 13.7%. The authors did not consider their higher BMI to represent excess body fat.

Significant difference

Upper-arm muscle area

In the experience-based comparison of primary-school boys, estimated upper-arm muscle area was higher in the more-experienced competitor group: 23.7 cm² versus 20.5 cm² (p < 0.05).

No significant difference

Left and right handgrip

Across the reported age groups, the study found no statistically significant difference between left- and right-hand grip strength.

Descriptive, not significant

Other experience-group measures

Body mass, BMI and grip strength were slightly higher in the more-experienced boys, but these differences were not reported as statistically significant.

Assessment principle

Use several measures together

The authors concluded that BMI should be interpreted alongside body-fat, muscularity and strength measures when assessing child athletes with greater muscle mass.

Interpretation and boundaries

A broader assessment can provide better context.

The practical message is not to discard BMI, but to avoid interpreting it in isolation. For a young athlete, estimated body fat, muscularity, strength, age, sex and training background may materially change how the same BMI value is understood.

What it may mean

Individualise the assessment

Accessible measurements can help coaches and appropriately qualified practitioners build a more complete picture of physical development. Repeated assessment over time may be more useful than a single isolated value.

Important limitations

What constrains the result

  • This was a small, cross-sectional study from one gymnastics centre, with no non-gymnast control group.
  • The wide age range and small sex- and experience-based subgroups limit generalisation.
What it does not establish

No diagnosis or causal claim

  • The study does not prove that gymnastics caused the observed muscularity or grip pattern.
  • It does not show that BMI is useless for all young athletes.
  • Its results do not provide individual dietary, medical or training advice for a child.
Research source

Read and cite the paper.

The official paper was published in Bulgarian. A complete English translation is provided separately for accessibility.

Formatted citation

Kolimechkov, S., Petrov, L., Ilinova, B., Alexandrova, A., Andreeva, L., & Atanasov, P. (2013). Assessment of the physical development of pre-school and primary school children practising artistic gymnastics. Journal of Sport Science (‘Спорт и Наука’), issue 4, 106–115.