Nettlefold, Lindsay

Purpose Assessing biological maturity in studies of children is challenging. Sex-specific regression equations developed using anthropometric measures are widely used to predict somatic maturity. However, prediction accuracy was not established in external samples. Thus, we aimed to evaluate the fit of these equations, assess for overfitting (adjusting as necessary), and calibrate using external samples. <p><p>Methods We evaluated potential overfitting using the original Pediatric Bone Mineral Accrual Study (PBMAS; 79 boys and 72 girls; 7.5–17.5 yr). We assessed change in R2 and standard error of the estimate (SEE) with the addition of predictor variables. We determined the effect of within-subject correlation using cluster-robust variance and fivefold random splitting followed by forward-stepwise regression. We used dominant predictors from these splits to assess predictive abilities of various models. We calibrated using participants from the Healthy Bones Study III (HBS-III; 42 boys and 39 girls; 8.9–18.9 yr) and Harpenden Growth Study (HGS; 38 boys and 32 girls; 6.5–19.1 yr). <p><p>Results Change in R2 and SEE was negligible when later predictors were added during step-by-step refitting of the original equations, suggesting overfitting. After redevelopment, new models included age × sitting height for boys (R2, 0.91; SEE, 0.51) and age × height for girls (R2, 0.90; SEE, 0.52). These models calibrated well in external samples; HBS boys: b0, 0.04 (0.05); b1, 0.98 (0.03); RMSE, 0.89; HBS girls: b0, 0.35 (0.04); b1, 1.01 (0.02); RMSE, 0.65; HGS boys: b0, −0.20 (0.02); b1, 1.02 (0.01); RMSE, 0.85; HGS girls: b0, −0.02 (0.03); b1, 0.97 (0.02); RMSE, 0.70; where b0 equals calibration intercept (standard error (SE)) and b1 equals calibration slope (SE), and RMSE equals root mean squared error (of prediction). We subsequently developed an age × height alternate for boys, allowing for predictions without sitting height. <p><p>Conclusion 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.

We revisit Stanley Garn's theory related to sex differences in endocortical and periosteal apposition during adolescence using a 12‐year mixed longitudinal study design. We used peripheral quantitative computed tomography to examine bone parameters in 230 participants (110 boys, 120 girls; aged 11.0 years at baseline). We assessed total (Tt.Ar, mm2), cortical (Ct.Ar, mm2), and medullary canal area (Me.Ar, mm2), Ct.Ar/Tt.Ar, cortical bone mineral density (Ct.BMD, mg/cm3), and polar strength‐strain index (SSIp, mm3) at the tibial midshaft (50% site). We used annual measures of height and chronological age to identify age at peak height velocity (APHV) for each participant. We compared annual accrual rates of bone parameters between boys and girls, aligned on APHV using a linear mixed effects model. At APHV, boys demonstrated greater Tt.Ar (ratio = 1.27; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.21, 1.32), Ct.Ar (1.24 [1.18, 1.30]), Me.Ar (1.31 [1.22, 1.40]), and SSIp (1.36 [1.28, 1.45]) and less Ct.Ar/Tt.Ar (0.98 [0.96, 1.00]) and Ct.BMD (0.97 [0.96, 0.97]) compared with girls. Boys and girls demonstrated periosteal bone formation and net bone loss at the endocortical surface. Compared with girls, boys demonstrated greater annual accrual rates pre‐APHV for Tt.Ar (1.18 [1.02, 1.34]) and Me.Ar (1.34 [1.11, 1.57]), lower annual accrual rates pre‐APHV for Ct.Ar/Tt.Ar (0.56 [0.29, 0.83]) and Ct.BMD (–0.07 [–0.17, 0.04]), and similar annual accrual rates pre‐APHV for Ct.Ar (1.10 [0.94, 1.26]) and SSIp (1.14 [0.98, 1.30]). Post‐APHV, boys demonstrated similar annual accrual rates for Ct.Ar/Tt.Ar (1.01 [0.71, 1.31]) and greater annual accrual rates for all other bone parameters compared with girls (ratio = 1.23 to 2.63; 95% CI 1.11 to 3.45). Our findings support those of Garn and others of accelerated periosteal apposition during adolescence, more evident in boys than girls. However, our findings challenge the notion of greater endocortical apposition in girls, suggesting instead that girls experience diminished endocortical resorption compared with boys.