The validity of automatic methods for estimating skeletal age in young athletes: a comparison of the BAUSport ultrasound system and BoneXpert with the radiographic method of Fels.

IF 4.2 2区 医学 Q1 SPORT SCIENCES
Biology of Sport Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-05-30 DOI:10.5114/biolsport.2024.127380
Sean P Cumming, Ramon Pi-Rusiñol, Gil Rodas, Franchek Drobnic, Alan D Rogol
{"title":"The validity of automatic methods for estimating skeletal age in young athletes: a comparison of the BAUSport ultrasound system and BoneXpert with the radiographic method of Fels.","authors":"Sean P Cumming, Ramon Pi-Rusiñol, Gil Rodas, Franchek Drobnic, Alan D Rogol","doi":"10.5114/biolsport.2024.127380","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study examined the validity of two automated methods (BAUSport, BoneXpert software using Fels, Greulich-Pyle, Tanner-Whithouse III protocols) for estimating skeletal age (SA) in young athletes in comparison to a reference standard (Fels). 85 male and female athletes, nine to seventeen years of age, from multiple sports were assessed for SA as part of an annual medical and health screening programme. Intra-class correlations demonstrated high degrees of association between the automatic methods for estimating SA (BAUSport r = .98; BoneXpert r = .96-.99) and the discrepancy between SA and chronological age (SA-CA) (BAUSport r = .93; BoneXpert r = .88-.97), with the reference standard. Concordance analyses for the categorisation of participants as early, on-time and late maturing also demonstrated substantial levels of agreement for both methods (BAUSport Kappa = .71; BoneXpert Fels Kappa = .63) with the reference standard. Bland-Altman plots comparing the automatic methods with the reference standard identified statistically significant fixed biases, ranging in magnitude from small to large. Collectively, these results suggest that BoneXpert and BAUSport can provide comparable estimates of SA and SA-CA in young athletes relative to the Fels method. Biases in the estimation of SA should, however, be considered and the automatic methods should be implemented as part of a comprehensive growth and maturity screening protocol. The non-invasive nature of the BAUSport method affords particular advantages (no radiation exposure, portability) in contexts where the regular estimation of SA is recommended.</p>","PeriodicalId":55365,"journal":{"name":"Biology of Sport","volume":"1 1","pages":"61-67"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10765447/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biology of Sport","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5114/biolsport.2024.127380","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/5/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study examined the validity of two automated methods (BAUSport, BoneXpert software using Fels, Greulich-Pyle, Tanner-Whithouse III protocols) for estimating skeletal age (SA) in young athletes in comparison to a reference standard (Fels). 85 male and female athletes, nine to seventeen years of age, from multiple sports were assessed for SA as part of an annual medical and health screening programme. Intra-class correlations demonstrated high degrees of association between the automatic methods for estimating SA (BAUSport r = .98; BoneXpert r = .96-.99) and the discrepancy between SA and chronological age (SA-CA) (BAUSport r = .93; BoneXpert r = .88-.97), with the reference standard. Concordance analyses for the categorisation of participants as early, on-time and late maturing also demonstrated substantial levels of agreement for both methods (BAUSport Kappa = .71; BoneXpert Fels Kappa = .63) with the reference standard. Bland-Altman plots comparing the automatic methods with the reference standard identified statistically significant fixed biases, ranging in magnitude from small to large. Collectively, these results suggest that BoneXpert and BAUSport can provide comparable estimates of SA and SA-CA in young athletes relative to the Fels method. Biases in the estimation of SA should, however, be considered and the automatic methods should be implemented as part of a comprehensive growth and maturity screening protocol. The non-invasive nature of the BAUSport method affords particular advantages (no radiation exposure, portability) in contexts where the regular estimation of SA is recommended.

估算年轻运动员骨骼年龄的自动方法的有效性:BAUSport 超声波系统和 BoneXpert 与 Fels 放射学方法的比较。
这项研究检验了两种自动方法(BAUSport、使用 Fels、Greulich-Pyle、Tanner-Whithouse III 协议的 BoneXpert 软件)在估算年轻运动员骨骼年龄(SA)方面的有效性,并与参考标准(Fels)进行了比较。作为年度医疗和健康检查计划的一部分,85 名来自多个运动项目的 9 至 17 岁男女运动员接受了骨骼年龄评估。类内相关性表明,自动估算SA的方法(BAUSport r = .98;BoneXpert r = .96-.99)和SA与实际年龄(SA-CA)之间的差异(BAUSport r = .93;BoneXpert r = .88-.97)与参考标准之间存在高度关联。对参与者进行早熟、准时成熟和晚熟分类的一致性分析表明,两种方法与参考标准的一致性也达到了相当高的水平(BAUSport Kappa = .71;BoneXpert Fels Kappa = .63)。将自动方法与参考标准进行比较的 Bland-Altman 图确定了具有统计学意义的固定偏差,偏差程度从大到小不等。总之,这些结果表明,相对于 Fels 方法,BoneXpert 和 BAUSport 可为年轻运动员提供具有可比性的 SA 和 SA-CA 估计值。不过,应考虑到SA估计值的偏差,并将自动方法作为全面生长和成熟度筛查方案的一部分。BAUSport 方法的非侵入性具有特别的优势(无辐射暴露、便携性),可用于建议定期估算 SA 值的场合。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Biology of Sport
Biology of Sport 生物-运动科学
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
12.50%
发文量
113
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Biology of Sport is the official journal of the Institute of Sport in Warsaw, Poland, published since 1984. Biology of Sport is an international scientific peer-reviewed journal, published quarterly in both paper and electronic format. The journal publishes articles concerning basic and applied sciences in sport: sports and exercise physiology, sports immunology and medicine, sports genetics, training and testing, pharmacology, as well as in other biological aspects related to sport. Priority is given to inter-disciplinary papers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信