Comparison of traditional and body height-adjusted assessment method for standing long jump

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-8108094/v1

The jumping distance achieved in the standing long jump SLJ is used to assess lower body strength. Traditionally, body height (hereinafter referred to as height) is not considered in the assessment (i.e., traditional SLJ or SLJ_T) and this may significantly disadvantage smaller children.

Data on SLJ, pole climbing (APCT) and push-up (PU) were collected from boys and girls in Austrian regular primary, secondary, and high school as well as in secondary and high school in elite sports classes. For SLJ, we computed an alternative score by dividing jumping distance by height as correction (height-adjusted SLJ or SLJ_H). In a linear mixed model, the regression slopes of SLJ_T on height were significantly different from that of APCT and PU in the five different contexts defined by school and type of class. In contrast, corresponding regression slopes of SLJ_H differed only in minor ways from those of APCT and PU. Thus, SLJ_H removed a bias due to height in the assessment of body strength and led to a fairer assessment of participants across different schools comprising regular and elite sports classes.

standing long jump

standing broad jump

fitness

assessment

test battery

fitness testing

The standing long jump (SLJ) - also called standing broad jump - is considered a suitable parameter for assessing the strength of the lower body musculature and may also be used to assess overall body strength. [1] In the ancient Olympic Games (five sequential SLJ´s) and the modern Olympic Games, the SLJ was part of the program as a sporting discipline until 1912. [2, 3] Currently, the SLJ is used as one of seven fitness parameters in the screening process for a sports career in the American National Football League (NFL) and, together with other psychological parameters, is used to rank players in the annual NFL Draft. [4] Furthermore, the SLJ is used in many national and international fitness test batteries [5–14], talent screenings [15–18] and selections for jobs with physical requirements [19–21] because the test is easy to conduct, cost-effective and provides a valid assessment of muscle strength. [1]

In SLJ, the body's center of gravity (from an optimal body angle) must be catapulted forward with the highest possible take-off velocity and an optimal take-off angle along a jumping path. During the flight phase, the lower limbs are moved forward as much as possible underneath the center of gravity in order to achieve the widest possible distance, under the requirement that the center of gravity continues to move forward during landing. [22–24] The SLJ is a complex specific test, and its results are influenced by a several factors. [25] Physiological factors include the strength of the upper and lower body limbs [26, 27], flexibility as a relevant factor for jumping height. [28] Psychological factors such as concentration and motivation also affect SLJ performance. [29–31] Technical elements in the execution of the jump are considered key performance factors and are divided into three phases: body movements immediately before take-off (take-off phase), behavior while in the air (flight phase), and landing technique (landing phase). [22–25, 32] In addition, body weight has a significant influence on SLJ performance - obese and overweight participants perform significantly worse than those of normal weight. [33, 34] All performance-influencing variables described above (physical, mental and technical factors) have something in common: they can be optimized through training [25, 35] and healthy nutrition. [36, 37]

Another factor influencing achievement in SLJ is height [22, 24], which naturally varies between individuals and is determined genetically, and cannot be adjusted by exercise or diet intervention. [38] Regarding children and adolescents, biological age and height have a non-modifiable influence on performance in SLJ. [39]

The SLJ is assessed primarily by measuring the maximum jump distance to the nearest centimeter and, in specific cases, by biomechanical analysis of the individual phases of movement. [22–24] In contrast to the biomechanical and kinematic assessments, participants' height is not considered when assessing and classifying their performance in SLJ. Consequently, smaller children are assessed significantly worse even if they have the same take-off speed and jumping technique (i.e., the same level of motor performance), because take-off and landing distances are directly related to their height. [40]

Therefore, alternative assessment methods are desirable to enable a fair, equitable and performance-differentiated assessment of SLJ achievement, particularly during growth. The aim of our study was to analyze the effects of including height as an anthropometric parameter when assessing SLJ.

Design and selection of participants

Findings from this study are based on a cross-sectional study conducted at one school campus in Klagenfurt, Austria, to develop a novel strength [41] and balance test [42]. Three different types of schools (primary school (age 6 to 10 years), secondary school (age 11 to 14 years) and high school (age 15 to 19 years)) are located in a single building complex. Students in secondary and high school were drawn from regular and elite sports classes. The study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the University of Graz, Styria, Austria (GZ. 39/68/63 ex 2021/22).

After approval by all school directors, a total of 1069 children, adolescents and young adults were invited to participate in the study. The legal guardians of children aged 14 years and younger were informed in writing about the content of the study and asked to consent to their children's participation. A total of 1048 (98.0%) participants or their legal guardians agreed to participate in the study and provided additional information (age, gender, and sport club membership).

After excluding children younger than 6 years, adolescents 19 years or older, and those who did not participate in the SLJ or at least two of the comparative tests), 810 children and adolescents (mean age 13.2 ± 3.3 years, 43.7% female) remained for analysis; 569 were from regular and 241 from elite sport classes. All participants took part in SLJ and APCT; children in primary and secondary school (N = 450) also completed the PU (Fig. 1).

Procedure and outcomes

All anthropometric and fitness-related measurements were conducted by trained sports scientists and sports teachers under the direction of the corresponding author between September 2023 and January 2024. The primary outcome of this study are differences between traditional SLJ performance assessment (i.e., jumping distance in cm; SLJ_T) and its modified assessment method of dividing SLJ jumping distance in cm divided by height in cm (SLJ_H). Specifically, we compare their alignments with measures of pole climbing and push-ups, two alternative measures of body strength.

Anthropometrics

Body weight (kg) was measured to the nearest 0.1 kg using a Bosch PPW4202/01 body scale (Bosch Hausgeräte, Vienna, Austria), Height was measured to the nearest 0.1 cm using a SECA 213 stadiometer (Seca GmbH&Co, Hamburg, Germany). Using a wall-mounted measuring tape, grip height was measured to the nearest centimeter. Participants stood barefoot on the floor, hands stretched vertically upwards, and the maximum distance between the floor and the fingertips of the upward-stretched hand was measured. Body mass index (BMI) was calculated by dividing the body weight by the height in meters squared.

Physical fitness assessments

Standing long jump (SLJ). Standing on a long jump mat at the starting line, the participants jumped as far as possible with both feet. The shortest distance between the starting line and landing of the heels on the ground was measured to the nearest centimeter. Three attempts were carried out, and the widest was included in the analysis.

Push-ups (PU). The test was carried out based on the German motor test manual [5]. Lying on their stomachs on the floor, the participants touched one hand with the other (above the gluteal muscles close to the spine.) in the starting position. To do a push-up correctly, the participants had to place their hands next to their shoulders and push their bodies up into a completely straight push-up position. In this position, they had to take one hand off the floor and touch the back of the other hand. After that, they had to put their hand back on the floor and return their body to the starting position in a controlled manner. The participants had to complete as many push-ups as possible within 40 seconds; the number of correctly performed push-ups was included in the analysis.

Austrian Pole Climbing Test (APCT). The test was carried out based on the test manual by Jarnig et al. [41]. Participants climbed continuously on a round, smooth climbing pole (steel pole ST35, ⌀ (42.5 ± 0.5) mm × (3.3 ± 0.1) mm) fixed at the top and bottom. Norm markings at heights of 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5 and 4.0 m above the ground were marked on the climbing pole. It was mandatory to climb over as many norm marks as possible; norm marks were considered to be climbed over when the participant's chin was placed over them. Within a period of 2 minutes, any number of climbing attempts could be started and breaks could be taken between climbing attempts according to individual needs. The last climbing attempt started within the two-minute period could be completed by each participant without time limit. The highest norm marking climbed was documented for each climbing attempt, and the overall climbing performance was calculated by adding up the heights of each climbing attempt, taking into account the grip height and the thickness of the fall protection mat. Validity and reliability of these fitness tests are well documented and considered suitable for use in field studies [41, 43].

Standardization

For SLJ_T and height z-scores (i.e., SLJ_Tz & zHeight) were calculated based on age- and gender-specific reference values. Since thus far no national reference values are available for SLJ or height, the mean (M) and standard deviation (SD) were derived based on the latest international percentiles [44] (Table S1 & S2). To derive reference values for SLJ_H, M of SLJ (M_SLJ) and height (M_height) as well as the SD for SLJ (SD_SLJ) (derived in Table S1 & S2) were used and age- and gender-specific M and SD values of SLJ_H were calculated (see supplementary material Table S3 - incl. calculation formula) to enable the calculation of z-scores for the novel assessment method (SLJ_Hz).

Age- and gender-adjusted PU and APCT z-scores were based on age- and gender-specific reference values [5, 41]. BMI z-scores were based on the International Obesity Task Force (IOTF) reference values [45].

Statistical Analysis

For data analyses and graphics, we used mainly tidyverse (version 2.0.0) [46] and easystats (version 0.7.5) [47] package suites in the R language (version 4.5.1 [48]). Inferential statistics were based on linear mixed models (LMMs). They were estimated and post-processed with the lme4 package (version 1.1-37a; Bates et al., 2015a [49]). Model selection followed the recommendations of Bates et al. (2015b) [50]. Due to the small number of observations only varying intercepts could be estimated with child as random factor.

Inferential statistics were based on two LMMs. The first one tested the hypothesized misalignment of traditional SLJ_T and alignment of height-adjusted SLJ_H with APCT. In the first set, we regressed APCT, SLJ_T, and SLJ_H (specified as three levels of a repeated-measure factor assessment) on height z-scores, adjusted for gender and age using gender as covariate nested within five contexts defined by elite/regular sports class and primary/secondary/high school. The slope for regressions of APCT on height was expected to be misaligned (i.e., ideally of a different sign) with the slope for SLJ_T, but aligned (i.e., ideally not significantly different) with the slope of SLJ_H. The second LMM replicated this analysis using PU in place of APCT. As PU was not assessed in high school, interactions of assessment contrasts with height were tested only in three contexts. As a further check of the relative merits of SLJ_H and SLJ_T, we predicted APCT and PU fitness by adding SLJ_T and SLJ_H to hierarchical multiple regression models with BMI, gender, and age in the five school/class contexts as covariates.

Descriptives

Girls and boys from five heterogeneous “contexts” (i.e., elite/regular sports classes from secondary and high school as well as from regular primary school) participated in the study. Supplement Table S4 reports breakdowns of means (M), standard deviations (SD), and number of observations (N) of standardized SLJ_H, SLJ_T, APCT, and PU scores as well as of age and BMI by gender and school. Linear regressions of the four assessments on height for girls and boys in the five contexts are shown in Fig. 2. Children in elite sports classes are clearly performing at a much higher level. More importantly, there is a clear qualitative misalignment of SLJ_T and a qualitative alignment of SLJ_H with APCT and PU in most groups, with the exception of boys in primary school and girls in regular high school, respectively.

Misalignment of SLJ_T and alignment of SLJ_H with APCT and PU

Statistical confirmation of SLJ_T misalignment and SLJ_H alignment was based on two LMMs that estimated (1) for each of five contexts the slopes for the regression of SLJ_T, SLJ_H, and APCT on zHeight and (2) for each of three contexts the slopes for the regression of SLJ_T, SLJ_H, and PU on zHeight whether the slopes of SLJ_T and SLJ_H were significantly different from those for APCT and PU, respectively. Table 1 shows the selection of relevant fixed effects for these assessment-by-height interactions from the final LMMs.

Table 1

Selection of fixed effects for interactions of (1) APCT, SLJ_T and SLJ_H and zHeight for five contexts (top) and (2) PU, SLJ_T and SLJ_H and height for three contexts.
APCT vs. SLJ_T × zHeight	Coeff	SE	z	p
Regular_PS	0.13	0.04	3.06	0.002
Regular_SS	0.23	0.04	5.78	< .001
Regular_HS	0.14	0.04	3.27	0.001
Elite_SS	0.22	0.06	3.73	< .001
Elite_HS	0.41	0.08	5.28	< .001
APCT vs. SLJ_H × zHeight
Regular_PS	-0.04	0.04	-0.88	0.377
Regular_SS	0.06	0.04	1.43	0.152
Regular_HS	-0.03	0.04	-0.64	0.520
Elite_SS	0.01	0.06	0.21	0.831
Elite_HS	0.21	0.08	2.74	0.006
PU vs. SLJ_T × zHeight
Regular_PS	0.12	0.04	2.64	0.008
Regular_SS	0.24	0.04	5.86	< .001
Elite_SS	0.18	0.06	3.12	0.002
PU vs. SLJ_H × zHeight
Regular_PS	-0.05	0.04	-1.15	0.251
Regular_SS	0.07	0.04	1.68	0.093
Elite_SS	-0.03	0.06	-0.56	0.577
Notes. For complete list of APCT-related fixed effects see Table S5 and for complete list of PU-related fixed effects see Table S6 in Supplement. zHeight = gender-age adjusted zHeight.

Figure 3 visualizes the qualitative difference between zero-order regression slopes of SLJ_T on height z-scores and those of the other three assessments in the five school/class contexts. All interactions testing the difference of height-slope between SLJ_T and APCT/PU were significant. Moreover, with one exception, none of these interactions were significant for SLJ_H. The exception was APCT for children in high-school elite sports class, in this case the slope difference was only about half the size of the difference for SLJ_T (0.21 vs. 0.41). The tables of fixed effects, including also significant main effects, the effect of gender, and other interactions, are documented in Supplement Table S5 for APCT and Table S6 for PU.

Prediction of PU and APCT

Adjusting SLJ by children’s height did not change their correlations with each other (r = .91; partial r = .95 adjusted for age and gender) and the similarity of their correlations with APCT (r = .71 for both) and PU (r = .63 and r = .67 for SLJ_T and SLJ_H, respectively). Therefore, for example, when we regressed the two measures of body strength PU (Fig. 4A) or APCT (Fig. 4B) on SLJ_T and SLJ_H z-scores there was no loss of information associated with the adjustment. The predictions of SLJ_H scores were always very similar to the predictions of SLJ_T scores in multiple regressions including agender, age, and BMI as covariates in three or five school/class contexts; small divergences were always in the direction of steeper slopes (i.e., better fits) for SLJ_H.

Changes in R² due to the unique effects of SLJ_H and SLJ_T were larger for SLJ_H than for SLJ_T ((APCT: 12.6% vs. 10.3%; PU: 15.6. % vs. 13.0%). Moreover, adding SLJ_H in a third step to models already including SLJ_T, significantly increased goodness of fit; APCT: F(1, 788) = 34.9, p < .001; PU: F(1, 436) = 25.9, p < .001. Conversely, adding SLJ_T to models with SLJ_H did not; F(1, 788) = 3.3, p = .07; PU: F(1, 436) = 1.2, p = .27.

Toward a fair and appropriate assessment of physical fitness

Anthropometric parameters and biological age directly influence fitness test results.[39] In a model calculation of the SLJ, an individual’s deviation from average height leads to a significantly better or worse assessment of muscle strength, keeping other physical parameters constant. [40] Indeed, as shown here, the usual assessment of muscle strength/fitness with the SLJ results in lower scores for smaller individuals – a difference not seen in other tests of physical muscle strength such as the APCT and PU. Using the alternative assessment method, that is taking height into account, resulted in muscle strength assessments that were comparable to the other muscle strength assessments (APCT & PU).

In regular school classes, no significant differences were found between the assessments by SLJ_H, APCT, and PU in terms of height, regardless of school level (primary school, secondary school, high school). The same applies to elite sports classes in secondary school, but not to elite sports classes in high school.

Elite sports classes in secondary school are attended by 10- to 14-year-old regional athletes who belong to a sports club, had to pass a sports entrance exam, and complete two to three hours of additional physical education and sports per week at school, compared to regular school classes. In contrast, elite sports classes in high school are attended by supra-regional athletes who complete high intensity, sport-specific training led by sports scientists throughout the day and do not participate in general physical education classes. In this context, the significant differences between SLJ_H, APCT, and PU in the elite sports classes in high school seem less important for a general assessment of SLH_H, as some participants (e.g., ski jumpers and track and field athletes) undergo high-intensity jump trainings and therefore the results cannot be generalized. Thus, our results and trends suggest that SLJ_H is more suitable and fairer for assessing muscle strength based on the SLJ performance than SLJ_T.

The practical value of the height-adjusted score for prediction of other fitness indicators such as APCT and PU may appear to be limited given larger than .90 zero-order and partial correlations with the traditional assessment. So why bother? We submit that at a minimum the high correlations show that the benefit of fairer assessment did not come at the cost of loss of predictive value when compared with the traditional score. Moreover, the two other measures of body strength, PU and APCT, were significantly better predicted with SLJ_H than SLJ_T after adjustment for gender and age across different school and types of sport classes.

In common widespread international fitness monitoring systems in Europe [8], America [10], Asia [12, 51], Africa [52] or Australia [53], age- and gender-specific normative values are used to assess participants in the children and youth sector; biological age does not play a role in these assessment models. It is however well known that biological age should be taken into account, especially in talent selection [54, 55], and there are methods such as Tanner stages [56] or maturity offset [57] used for this purpose in long-term studies or talent selection systems regionally. Furthermore, hand-wrist scans can be used to estimate the full-growth potential of children and adolescents [58]. However, due to cost and time restrictions, these methods are not used in widespread monitoring programs, even though biological age has a significant impact on fitness test results in children and adolescents. [59] Therefore, taking SLJ as an example, we propose to develop alternative options, for instance by taking height into account, particularly regarding fitness assessments in schools.

Results of fitness tests play an important role in selecting children and young people for sports schools or elite training centers. In this context, greater height is often advantageous for athletic skills and therefore often and generally welcome.[38] In sports such as basketball, athletics, or volleyball, height is an important performance-determining parameter. In contrast, however, there are also sports like soccer where height plays no major role. Male soccer stars such as Lionel Messi and Diego Maradona have won world championship, Olympic Games and many other competitions despite being shorter than 1.70 m.[60] In team sports such as soccer, action speed, mobility, athletics, technique and game intelligence are performance-determining parameters, and a high height is not essential.[61] In such sports, assessing fitness without a disadvantage for smaller individuals would be useful, and reduce chances of overlooking talent among smaller athletes. Existing fitness test assessment methods should be critically reviewed and adapted if they are replaced by more sensible, easy-to-use and practical new assessment methods that consider anthropometric differences. This can increase fairness and equality in the field of children and young people and also increase participants' motivation. The latter aspect is worth being explored in further studies.

Strengths and limitations

This study has several strengths, including a large sample size and the fact that all data were collected by a team of testers consisting of four people under the supervision of the corresponding author. In addition, data from children, adolescents and young adults were analyzed and correlated with additional strength tests.

One limitation is that for practical reasons the assessment of jumping performance was based only on jumping distance in relation to height. Other parameters influencing performance such as jumping technique, physical conditions and motivation were not considered.

It is important to highlight the fitness parameter being tested with SLJ. It is used as a measure of the lower body muscle strength of participants, and the actual distance jumped is not the primary outcome of interest. The usual assessment of muscle strength/fitness based on the SLJ disadvantages smaller individuals; taking their height into account (like SLJ_H) is an effective and practical alternative and results in a fairer assessment. In addition, the simple method of adjustment represents a useful addition to current scientific approaches in long-term studies in children and adolescents, as it enables a more precise evaluation during the growth period by allowing growth spurts to be specifically taken into account. Further nationwide studies should be organized and carried out to create representative normal and reference values. In addition, regional studies should be carried out to investigate whether novel assessment methods of fitness tests including anthropometrics may have an impact on the motivation of participants.

APCT Austrian Pole Climbing Test

IOTF International Obesity Task Force

M Mean

NFL National Football League

PU Push-ups

SD Standard deviation

SLJ Standing long jump

SLJ_H Assessment method taking into account the body height of participants

SLJ_T Traditional assessment method

The legal guardians of the 14- to 18-year-old participants were informed at school registration that the children in their care could be invited to participate in various studies during school hours and that they could provide consent independently."

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the University of Graz, Styria, Austria (GZ. 39/68/63 ex 2021/22).

Informed consent

was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Funding

This research and the Open Access publishing costs were funded by the Austrian Federal Ministry of Education, Science and Research, grant number GZ:2024 − 0.780.614 and the Austrian Federal Ministry for Arts, Culture, Civil Service and Sport, grant number GZ:2025 − 0.021.608. The Open Access was funded by the University of Graz. The University of Graz funded open access publishing.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, G.J. and M.N.M.v.P.; methodology, G.J.; formal analysis, G.J. and R.Kl.; investigation, G.J.; resources, G.J.; data curation, G.J.; writing—original draft preparation, G.J. and R.Kl.; writing—review and editing, G.J., R.Ke., R.Kl. and M.N.M.v.P.; visualization, G.J. and R.Kl.; supervision, M.N.M.v.P.; project administration, G.J.; funding acquisition, G.J. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available upon request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy/ethical restriction.

Castro-Piñero J, Ortega FB, Artero EG, Girela-Rejón MJ, Mora J, Sjöström M, Ruiz JR (2010) Assessing muscular strength in youth: usefulness of standing long jump as a general index of muscular fitness. J Strength Cond Res 24:1810–1817. 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181ddb03d
Spivey N (2012) The Ancient Olympics; Oxford University Press, ISBN 9780199602698
Miller D (2012) The Official History of the Olympic Games and the IOC – Part I: The Early Years (1894–1936); Random House, ISBN 9781780575056
Kuzmits FE, Adams AJ (2008) The NFL combine: does it predict performance in the National Football League? J Strength Cond Res 22:1721–1727. 10.1519/JSC.0b013e318185f09d
Bös K Deutscher Motorik-Test 6–18: (DMT 6–18): Manual und internetbasierte Auswertungssoftware, 2. Auflage; Feldhaus, Edition Czwalina: Hamburg, 2016, ISBN 9783880206434
Jurak G, Kovac M, Sember V, Starc G (2019) 30 Years of SLOfit: Its Legacy and Perspective. TurkJSportsMed 54, 23–27. 10.5152/tjsm.2019.148
Štefan L, Neljak B, Petrić V, Kasović M, Vespalec T (2022) Normative Data for Musculoskeletal Fitness in 13,217 Children and Adolescents: The Croatian Fitness (CROFIT) Study. Res Q Exerc Sport 93:528–536. 10.1080/02701367.2021.1873903
Council of Europe (1993) EUROFIT: handbook for the EUROFIT tests of physical fitness, 2nd ed.; Sports Division Strasbourg Council of Europe Publishing and Documentation Service: Strasbourg
Santos R, Mota J (2011) The ALPHA health-related physical fitness test battery for children and adolescents. Nutr Hosp 1199–1200. 10.3305/nh.2011.26.6.5561
The Cooper Institute, T.C. FitnessGram Administration Manual: The Journey to MyHealthyZone, 5th ed.; Human Kinetics: Champaign (2017) ISBN 9781492579670
Liu X, Keating XD, Shangguan R (2017) Historical Analyses of Fitness Testing of College Students in China. ICHPER-SD J Res 9:24–32
Tantsekuzhin NO, Astafev NV, Nayn AA (2019) The Role of All-Russian Physical Culture-Sports Ready For Labor and Defense (GTO) Complex in the System of Junior School Children Education. First International Volga Region Conference on Economics, Humanities and Sports. Atlantis Press: Amsterdam, Netherlands,
Stemper T, Bachmann C, Diehlmann K, Kemper B (2020) DüMo Düsseldorfer Modell der Bewegungs-, Sport- und Talentförderung: 2003–2018: Konzept, Normwerte, Untersuchungsergebnisse; LIT: Berlin, ISBN 9783643147783
Jarnig G, Jaunig J, Kerbl R, Lima RA, van Poppel MNM (2022) A Novel Monitoring System (AUT FIT) for Anthropometrics and Physical Fitness in Primary School Children in Austria: A Cross-Sectional Pilot Study. Sports 10(4). 10.3390/sports10010004
Huang X, Wang G, Chen C, Liu J, Kristiansen B, Hohmann A, Zhao K (2021) Constructing a Talent Identification Index System and Evaluation Model for Cross-Country Skiers. J Sports Sci 39:368–379. 10.1080/02640414.2020.1823084
Lidor R, Falk B, Arnon M, Cohen Y, Segal GIL, Lander Y (2005) Measurement of talent in team handball: the questionable use of motor and physical tests. J Strength Conditioning Res 19:318–325
Chaabene H, Negra Y, Capranica L, Bouguezzi R, Hachana Y, Rouahi MA, Mkaouer B (2018) Validity and Reliability of a New Test of Planned Agility in Elite Taekwondo Athletes. J Strength Cond Res 32:2542–2547. 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002325
Vaeyens R, Malina RM, Janssens M, van Renterghem B, Bourgois J, Vrijens J, Philippaerts RM (2006) A multidisciplinary selection model for youth soccer: the Ghent Youth Soccer Project. Br J Sports Med 40:928–934 discussion 934. 10.1136/bjsm.2006.029652
Foulis SA, Sharp MA, Redmond JE, Frykman PN, Warr BJ, Gebhardt DL, Baker TA, Canino MC, Zambraski EJ (2017) U.S. Army Physical Demands Study: Development of the Occupational Physical Assessment Test for Combat Arms soldiers. J Sci Med Sport 20(Suppl 4):S74–S78. 10.1016/j.jsams.2017.07.018
Pihlainen K, Santtila M, Häkkinen K, Kyröläinen H (2018) Associations of Physical Fitness and Body Composition Characteristics With Simulated Military Task Performance. J Strength Cond Res 32:1089–1098. 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001921
Plat MJ, Frings-Dresen MHW, Sluiter JK (2011) A systematic review of job-specific workers' health surveillance activities for fire-fighting, ambulance, police and military personnel. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 84:839–857. 10.1007/s00420-011-0614-y
Wakai M, Linthorne NP (2005) Optimum take-off angle in the standing long jump. Hum Mov Sci 24:81–96. 10.1016/j.humov.2004.12.001
Fernandez-Santos JR, Gonzalez-Montesinos JL, Ruiz JR, Jiménez-Pavón D, Castro-Piñero J (2018) Kinematic analysis of the standing long jump in children 6- to 12-years-old. Meas Phys Educ Exerc Sci 22:70–78. 10.1080/1091367X.2017.1383913
Cheng K-YB, Chen W-C (2005) Optimal Standing Long Jump Simulation from Different Starting Postures. J Mech Med Biol 05:203–215. 10.1142/S0219519405001400
Zhou H, Yu P, Thirupathi A, Liang M (2020) How to Improve the Standing Long Jump Performance? A Mininarrative Review. Appl. Bionics Biomech. 2020, 8829036. 10.1155/2020/8829036
Wang Y, Dong D (2023) Effects of muscle strength in different parts of adolescent standing long jump on distance based on surface electromyography. Front Physiol 14:1246776. 10.3389/fphys.2023.1246776
Nakai Y, Usumoto Y, Takeshita Y (2024) The Effects of Regional Muscle Strength and Mass on Standing Long Jump Performance. Muscles 3:60–70. 10.3390/muscles3010007
Bogalho D, Gomes R, Mendes R, Dias G, Castro MA (2022) Impact of Flexibility on Vertical Jump, Balance and Speed in Amateur Football Players. Appl Sci 12:5425. 10.3390/app12115425
Simpson T, Cronin L, Ellison P, Carnegie E, Marchant D (2020) A test of optimal theory on young adolescents' standing long jump performance and motivation. Hum Mov Sci 72:102651. 10.1016/j.humov.2020.102651
Porter JM, Ostrowski EJ, Nolan RP, Wu WFW (2010) Standing long-jump performance is enhanced when using an external focus of attention. J Strength Cond Res 24:1746–1750. 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181df7fbf
Becker KA, Fairbrother JT, Couvillion KF (2020) The effects of attentional focus in the preparation and execution of a standing long jump. Psychol Res 84:285–291. 10.1007/s00426-018-0999-2
Ashby BM, Heegaard JH (2002) Role of arm motion in the standing long jump. J Biomech 35:1631–1637. 10.1016/s0021-9290(02)00239-7
Alaniz-Arcos JL, Ortiz-Cornejo ME, Larios-Tinoco JO, Klünder-Klünder M, Vidal-Mitzi K, Gutiérrez-Camacho C (2023) Differences in the absolute muscle strength and power of children and adolescents with overweight or obesity: a systematic review. BMC Pediatr 23:474. 10.1186/s12887-023-04290-w
Castro-Piñero J, González-Montesinos JL, Mora J, Keating XD, Girela-Rejón MJ, Sjöström M, Ruiz JR (2009) Percentile values for muscular strength field tests in children aged 6 to 17 years: influence of weight status. J Strength Cond Res 23:2295–2310. 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181b8d5c1
Chen C-F, Wu H-J (2022) The Effect of an 8-Week Rope Skipping Intervention on Standing Long Jump Performance. IJERPH 19, 10.3390/ijerph19148472
Ramage S, Farmer A, Eccles KA, McCargar L (2014) Healthy strategies for successful weight loss and weight maintenance: a systematic review. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 39:1–20. 10.1139/apnm-2013-0026
Bleich SN, Vercammen KA, Zatz LY, Frelier JM, Ebbeling CB, Peeters A (2018) Interventions to prevent global childhood overweight and obesity: a systematic review. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 6:332–346. 10.1016/S2213-8587(17)30358-3
Samaras TT (2007) Human Body Size and the Laws of Scaling: Physiological, Performance, Growth, Longevity and Ecological Ramifications; Nova Publishers, ISBN 9781600214080
Albaladejo-Saura M, Vaquero-Cristóbal R, González-Gálvez N, Esparza-Ros F (2021) Relationship between Biological Maturation, Physical Fitness, and Kinanthropometric Variables of Young Athletes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. IJERPH 18, 10.3390/ijerph18010328
Jarnig G, van Poppel MNM, Kerbl R (2025) Model Calculation of the Effect of Body Height On Performance in Standing Long Jump. Paediatr Paedolog Austria 60:128–131. 10.1007/s00608-025-01289-7
Jarnig G, Kerbl R, van Poppel MNM, Reliability (2024) Objectivity, Validity, and Reference Levels of the Austrian Pole Climbing Test (APCT)-A Novel Monitoring Tool for Assessing General Fitness in Children, Adolescents, and Young Adults. Sports (Basel) 12. 10.3390/sports12090258
Jarnig G, Kerbl R, van Poppel MNM, Reliability (2025) Objectivity, Validity and Reference Levels of the Austrian Balance Check (ABC)-A Novel Balance Field Test for Children, Adolescents and Young Adults to Assess Static Balance. Sports (Basel) 13. 10.3390/sports13010005
Bös K (2017) Handbuch motorische Tests: Sportmotorische Tests, motorische Funktionstests, Fragebögen zur körperlich-sportlichen Aktivität und sportpsychologische Diagnoseverfahren, 3., überarbeitete und erweiterte Auflage; Hogrefe: Göttingen, ISBN 9783801723699
Ortega FB, Leskošek B, Blagus R, Gil-Cosano JJ, Mäestu J, Tomkinson GR, Ruiz JR, Mäestu E, Starc G, Milanovic I et al (2023) European fitness landscape for children and adolescents: updated reference values, fitness maps and country rankings based on nearly 8 million test results from 34 countries gathered by the FitBack network. Br J Sports Med 57:299. 10.1136/bjsports-2022-106176
Cole TJ, Lobstein T (2012) Extended international (IOTF) body mass index cut-offs for thinness, overweight and obesity. Pediatr Obes 7:284–294. 10.1111/j.2047-6310.2012.00064.x
Wickham H, Averick M, Bryan J, Chang W, McGowan L, François R, Grolemund G, Hayes A, Henry L, Hester J et al (2019) Welcome to the Tidyverse. JOSS 4, 1686. 10.21105/joss.01686
Lüdecke D, Makowski D, Ben-Shachar MS, Patil I, Wiernik BM, Bacher E, Thériault R easystats: Framework for Easy Statistical Modeling, Visualization, and Reporting. CRAN. Available online: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/easystats/index.html
R Core Team (2025) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria,
Bates D, Mächler M, Bolker B, Walker S (2015) Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4. J Stat Soft 67. 10.18637/jss.v067.i01
Bates D, Kliegl R, Vasishth S, Baayen H (2015b) Parsimonious Mixed Models, Available online: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1506.04967
Zhu Z, Yang Y, Kong Z, Zhang Y, Zhuang J (2017) Prevalence of physical fitness in Chinese school-aged children: Findings from the 2016 Physical Activity and Fitness in China—The Youth Study. J Sport Health Sci 6:395–403. 10.1016/j.jshs.2017.09.003
Muthuri SK, Wachira L-JM, Leblanc AG, Francis CE, Sampson M, Onywera VO, Tremblay MS (2014) Temporal trends and correlates of physical activity, sedentary behaviour, and physical fitness among school-aged children in Sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review. Int J Environ Res Public Health 11:3327–3359. 10.3390/ijerph110303327
Catley MJ, Tomkinson GR (2013) Normative health-related fitness values for children: analysis of 85347 test results on 9-17-year-old Australians since 1985. Br J Sports Med 47:98–108. 10.1136/bjsports-2011-090218
Vaeyens R, Lenoir M, Williams AM, Philippaerts RM (2008) Talent identification and development programmes in sport: current models and future directions. Sports Med 38:703–714. 10.2165/00007256-200838090-00001
Fuchslocher J, Romann M, Gulbin J Strategies to support developing talent, 10–14
Travers SH, Jeffers BW, Bloch CA, Hill JO, Eckel RH (1995) Gender and Tanner stage differences in body composition and insulin sensitivity in early pubertal children. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 80:172–178. 10.1210/jcem.80.1.7829608
Mirwald R, Baxter-Jones AD, BAILEY DA, BEUNEN GP (2002) An assessment of maturity from anthropometric measurements. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise 34
Romann M, Fuchslocher J (2016) Assessment of skeletal age on the basis of DXA-derived hand scans in elite youth soccer. Res Sports Med 24:185–196. 10.1080/15438627.2016.1191490
Leyhr D, Murr D, Basten L, Eichler K, Hauser T, Lüdin D, Romann M, Sardo G, Höner O (2020) Biological Maturity Status in Elite Youth Soccer Players: A Comparison of Pragmatic Diagnostics With Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Front Sports Act Living 2:587861. 10.3389/fspor.2020.587861
Brach B (2012) Who is Lionel Messi? A comparative study of Diego Maradona and Lionel Messi. Int J Cult Stud 15:415–428. 10.1177/1367877911422859
Bate R, Jeffreys I (2014) Soccer Speed; Human Kinetics, ISBN 9781492584803

The authors declare no competing interests.

Supplementarymaterial.docx

Comparison of traditional and body height-adjusted assessment method for standing long jump

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Materials and Methods

Design and selection of participants

Procedure and outcomes

Anthropometrics

Physical fitness assessments

Standardization

Statistical Analysis

Results

Descriptives

Misalignment of SLJ_T and alignment of SLJ_H with APCT and PU

Prediction of PU and APCT

Discussion

Toward a fair and appropriate assessment of physical fitness

Strengths and limitations

Conclusion

Abbreviations

Declarations

Conflicts of Interest

Funding

Author Contributions

Data Availability Statement

References

Additional Declarations

Supplementary Files

Status:

Version 1