2015
DOI: 10.1249/mss.0000000000000588
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Enhancing a Somatic Maturity Prediction Model

Abstract: Our equations provided good fits in external samples and provide an alternative to commonly used models. Original prediction equations were simplified with no meaningful increase in estimation error.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

6
453
0
13

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 446 publications
(479 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
6
453
0
13
Order By: Relevance
“…The study also used a validated estimator of somatic maturity (i.e. years from PHV [maturity offset]), which has recently been revalidated [38], rather than relying on self-reported stage of sexual maturation. However, the study also possesses limitations.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The study also used a validated estimator of somatic maturity (i.e. years from PHV [maturity offset]), which has recently been revalidated [38], rather than relying on self-reported stage of sexual maturation. However, the study also possesses limitations.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…BMI z-scores were assigned [32] and age and sex specific BMI cut points established children as normal weight or overweight/obese (those who were underweight were grouped into the normal weight category) [33]. Gender-specific equations were used to predict children′s age from peak height velocity (APHV), as a proxy measure of biological maturation [34]. Waist circumference was measured to the nearest 0.1 cm using an anthropometric tape measure, and the percentage of waist circumference-to-height ratio (%WHtR) was calculated as a measure of central adiposity [35].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This appears to be useful near the time of actual PHV in average maturing boys within a narrow CA range, 13.00–14.99 years,21 32 which limits its utility with male athletes who tend to mature early 19. The protocol appears to overestimate age at PHV in girls more than in boys,22 31 which may limit its use.…”
Section: Assessment Of Maturity Status and Timingmentioning
confidence: 99%