This study examines the scientific landscape of research on biological maturation in youth sport through a comprehensive bibliometric and network analysis. A total of 457 publications indexed in Web of Science were analyzed to identify production trends, thematic evolution, authorship structures, institutional collaboration patterns, and citation dynamics. Network structure was assessed using Total Link Strength (TLS). Results reveal sustained growth in publications since 2012, with maturation emerging as a central thematic axis linked to talent identification and performance research. The field exhibits moderate collaborative density, characterized by hub-oriented structures in which a limited number of authors and institutions concentrate structural influence. Institutional analysis indicates productivity concentration consistent with cumulative advantage dynamics, alongside asymmetrical participation across regions. These findings suggest that research on biological maturation in youth sport is undergoing conceptual consolidation while remaining structurally centralized. Greater cross-regional and interdisciplinary integration may enhance scientific equity and knowledge diversification within the field.
AbramoG.D’AngeloC. A.Di CostaF. (2019). The effect of multiauthorship on the impact of research articles. Journal of Informetrics, 13(4), 100990. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2019.100990
BennettH.SinghB.SlatteryF. (2024). Journal self-citations trends in sport sciences: An analysis of disciplinary journals from 2013 to 2022. Scientometrics, 129, 4741–4750. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-024-05096-y
CobleyS.BakerJ.WattieN.McKennaJ. (2009). Annual age-grouping and athlete development: A meta-analytical review of relative age effects in sport. Sports Medicine, 39(3), 235–256. https://doi.org/10.2165/00007256-200939030-00005
8.
CoimbraD. R.DominskiF. H.CorreiaC. K.AndradeA. (2019). Scientific production in sports science journals: Bibliometric analysis. Revista Brasileira de Medicina do Esporte, 25, 1–93. https://doi.org/10.1590/1517-869220192501208554
9.
CôtéJ.HancockD. J. (2016). Evidence-based policies for youth sport programmes. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics, 8(1), 51–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/19406940.2014.919338
De BosscherV.BinghamJ.ShibliS.Van BottenburgM.De KnopP. (2008). The global sporting arms race: An international comparative study on sports policy factors leading to international sporting success: Meyer & Meyer Sport.
12.
European Commission. (2021). Horizon Europe partnerships: Strategic priorities and implementation: Publications Office of the European Union.
13.
Fraser-ThomasJ. L.CôtéJ.DeakinJ. (2005). Youth sport programs: An avenue to foster positive youth development. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 10(1), 19–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/1740898042000334890
14.
HaakL. L.FennerM.PaglioneL.PentzE.RatnerH. (2012). ORCID: A system to uniquely identify researchers. Learned Publishing, 25(4), 259–264. https://doi.org/10.1087/20120404
15.
HammerschmidtJ.CalabuigF.KrausS.Arjona-FuentesJ. M.Reyes-MenendezA. (2024). Tracing the state of sport management research: A bibliometric analysis. Management Review Quarterly, 74(2), 1185–1208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-023-00331-x
16.
HaytonJ. W.BlundellM. (2021). Exploring the relationship between social class and sport event volunteering. Sport Management Review, 24(1), 92–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2020.06.002
17.
Hedt-GauthierB. L.JeufackH. M.NeufeldN. H.AlemA.SauerS.OdhiamboJ.BoumY.ShuchmanM.VolminkJ. (2019). Stuck in the middle: A systematic review of authorship in collaborative health research in Africa, 2014–2016. BMJ Global Health, 4(5), e001853. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2019-001853
18.
Hernández-GonzálezV.Carné-TorrentJ. M.Jové-DeltellC.Pano-RodríguezÁ.Reverter-MasíaJ. (2022). The top 100 Most cited scientific papers in the public, environmental and occupational health category of web of science: A bibliometric and visualized analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(15), 9645. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19159645
19.
Hernández-GonzálezV.Conesa-MiliánE.Jové-DeltellC.Pano-RodríguezÁ.Legaz-ArreseA.Reverter-MasíaJ. (2024). Global research trends on cardiac troponin and physical activity among pediatric populations: A bibliometric analysis and science mapping study. Frontiers in Pediatrics, 12, 1285794. https://doi.org/10.3389/fped.2024.1285794
20.
HirschJ. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102(46), 16569–16572. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102
MalinaR. M.RogolA. D.CummingS. P.Coelho e SilvaM. J.FigueiredoA. J.KonarskiJ. M.KoziełS. M. (2015). Biological maturation of youth athletes: Assessment and implications. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 49(13), 852–859. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2015-094623
MeylanCCroninJOliverJHughesM (2010). Talent Identification in Soccer: The Role of Maturity Status on Physical, Physiological and Technical Characteristics. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 5(4), 571–592. https://doi.org/10.1260/1747-9541.5.4.571
26.
MongeonP.Paul-HusA. (2016). The journal coverage of web of science and scopus: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 106(1), 213–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5
27.
NielsenM. W.AndersenJ. P. (2021). Global citation inequality is on the rise. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(7), e2012208118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2012208118
28.
Ortega-RubioA.Murillo-AmadorB.Troyo-DiéguezE.Valdez-CepedaD. (2021). El índice h: Sobrevaloración de su uso en la estimación del impacto del quehacer científico en México. Terra Latinoamericana, 39, 39. https://doi.org/10.28940/terra.v39i0.895
29.
ShengY.HuitingZ.QiangZ.ChenhuiL. (2024). A corpus-based bibliometric study of highly cited papers in sport sciences. Sage Open, 14(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231225856
30.
Torres-SalinasD. (2024). Análisis de la colaboración científica en el marco de la bibliometría evaluativa: Universidad de Granada. https://hdl.handle.net/10481/89437
31.
VaeyensR.LenoirM.WilliamsA. M.PhilippaertsR. M. (2008). Talent identification and development programmes in sport: Current models and future directions. Sports Medicine, 38(9), 703–714. https://doi.org/10.2165/00007256-200838090-00001
32.
Van EckN. J.WaltmanL.DekkerR.Van den BergJ. (2010). A comparison of two techniques for bibliometric mapping: Multidimensional scaling and VOS. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(12), 2405–2416. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21421
33.
WangS.ZhouH.ZhengL.ZhuW.ZhuL.FengD.WeiJ.ChenG.JinX.YangH.ShiX.LvX. (2021). Global trends in research of macrophages associated with acute lung injury over past 10 years: A bibliometric analysis. Frontiers in Immunology, 12, 669539. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2021.669539
34.
WuchtyS.JonesB. F.UzziB. (2007). The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science, 316(5827), 1036–1039. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1136099
35.
YuY.LiY.ZhangZ.GuZ.ZhongH.ZhaQ.YangL.ZhuC.ChenE. (2020). A bibliometric analysis using VOSviewer of publications on COVID-19. Annals of Translational Medicine, 8(13), 816. https://doi.org/10.21037/atm-20-4235
