Literature DB >> 29082464

Tanner-Whitehouse Skeletal Ages in Male Youth Soccer Players: TW2 or TW3?

Robert M Malina1,2, Manuel J Coelho-E-Silva3, António J Figueiredo3, Renaat M Philippaerts4, Norikazu Hirose5, Maria Eugenia Peña Reyes6, Giulio Gilli7, Andrea Benso8, Roel Vaeyens4,9, Dieter Deprez4, Luiz G A Guglielmo10, Rojapon Buranarugsa11.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Tanner-Whitehouse radius-ulna-short bone protocol (TW2 RUS) for the assessment of skeletal age (SA) is widely used to estimate the biological (skeletal) maturity status of children and adolescents. The scale for converting TW RUS ratings to an SA has been revised (TW3 RUS) and has implications for studies of youth athletes in age-group sports.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare TW2 and TW3 RUS SAs in an international sample of male youth soccer players and to compare distributions of players by maturity status defined by each SA protocol.
METHODS: SA assessments with the TW RUS method were collated for 1831 male soccer players aged 11-17 years from eight countries. RUS scores were converted to TW2 and TW3 SAs using the appropriate tables. SAs were related to chronological age (CA) in individual athletes and compared by CA groups. The difference of SA minus CA with TW2 SA and with TW3 SA was used to classify players as late, average, or early maturing with each method. Concordance of maturity classifications was evaluated with Cohen's Kappa coefficients.
RESULTS: For the same RUS score, TW3 SAs were systematically and substantially reduced compared with TW2 SAs; mean differences by CA group ranged from - 0.97 to - 1.16 years. Kappa coefficients indicated at best fair concordance of TW2 and TW3 maturity classifications. Across the age range, 42% of players classified as average with TW2 SA were classified as late with TW3 SA, and 64% of players classified as early with TW2 SA were classified as average with TW3 SA.
CONCLUSION: TW3 SAs were systematically lower than corresponding TW2 SAs in male youth soccer players. The differences between scales have major implications for the classification of players by maturity status, which is central to some talent development programs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29082464     DOI: 10.1007/s40279-017-0799-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sports Med        ISSN: 0112-1642            Impact factor:   11.136


  64 in total

1.  Use of the new US90 standards for TW-RUS skeletal maturity scores in youths from the Italian population.

Authors:  M Vignolo; A Naselli; P Magliano; E Di Battista; M Aicardi; G Aicardi
Journal:  Horm Res       Date:  1999

Review 2.  Skeletal age and age verification in youth sport.

Authors:  Robert M Malina
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2011-11-01       Impact factor: 11.136

Review 3.  DIAGNOSIS OF ENDOCRINE DISEASE: On the need for national-, racial-, or ethnic-specific standards for the assessment of bone maturation.

Authors:  Ze'ev Hochberg
Journal:  Eur J Endocrinol       Date:  2015-09-28       Impact factor: 6.664

4.  TW2 and TW3 bone ages: time to change?

Authors:  M Lynn Ahmed; Justin T Warner
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 3.791

Review 5.  Indicators of biological maturation and secular changes in biological maturation.

Authors:  Gaston P Beunen; Alan D Rogol; Robert M Malina
Journal:  Food Nutr Bull       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 2.069

6.  Relationships among birth-month distribution, skeletal age and anthropometric characteristics in adolescent elite soccer players.

Authors:  Norikazu Hirose
Journal:  J Sports Sci       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 3.337

7.  Top 10 research questions related to growth and maturation of relevance to physical activity, performance, and fitness.

Authors:  Robert M Malina
Journal:  Res Q Exerc Sport       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 2.500

8.  Secular trends for takeoff and maximum adolescent growth for eight decades of Japanese cohort data.

Authors:  Md. Ayub Ali; Pete E. Lestrel; Fumio Ohtsuki
Journal:  Am J Hum Biol       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 1.937

9.  Is TW3 height prediction more accurate than TW2? Preliminary data.

Authors:  C Bertaina; B Stasiowska; A Benso; S Vannelli
Journal:  Horm Res       Date:  2006-11-27

Review 10.  Hand X-ray in pediatric endocrinology: Skeletal age assessment and beyond.

Authors:  Vincenzo De Sanctis; Salvatore Di Maio; Ashraf T Soliman; Giuseppe Raiola; Rania Elalaily; Giuseppe Millimaggi
Journal:  Indian J Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2014-11
View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  Bio-Banding in Youth Sports: Background, Concept, and Application.

Authors:  Robert M Malina; Sean P Cumming; Alan D Rogol; Manuel J Coelho-E-Silva; Antonio J Figueiredo; Jan M Konarski; Sławomir M Kozieł
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 11.136

2.  Characteristics of select and non-select U15 male soccer players.

Authors:  Jan M Konarski; Magdalena Krzykała; Mateusz Skrzypczak; Monika Nowakowska; Manuel J Coelho-E-Silva; Sean P Cumming; Robert M Malina
Journal:  Biol Sport       Date:  2020-12-30       Impact factor: 4.606

3.  Physical characteristics of elite youth male football players aged 13-15 are based upon biological maturity.

Authors:  Shidong Yang; Haichun Chen
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2022-05-05       Impact factor: 3.061

4.  Skeletal age assessed by TW2 using 20-bone, carpal and RUS score systems: Intra-observer and inter-observer agreement among male pubertal soccer players.

Authors:  Paulo Sousa-E-Silva; Manuel J Coelho-E-Silva; Andre Seabra; Daniela C Costa; Diogo V Martinho; João P Duarte; Tomás Oliveira; João Gonçalves-Santos; Inês Rodrigues; Luis P Ribeiro; António J Figueiredo; Jan M Konarski; Sean P Cumming; Robert M Malina
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-08-23       Impact factor: 3.752

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.