Validity of Self-Assessed Sexual Maturation Against Physician Assessments and Hormone Levels
- PMID: 28438374
- PMCID: PMC5492944
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2017.03.050
Validity of Self-Assessed Sexual Maturation Against Physician Assessments and Hormone Levels
Abstract
Objective: To compare self-report and physician assessments of sexual maturation against serum hormone markers to evaluate the hypothesis that the validity of self-assessed sexual maturation is underestimated in traditional validation studies.
Study design: We adapted a self-assessment instrument that 248 Mexican children and adolescents, aged 8-13 years, completed. The participants were examined by a trained pediatrician and provided fasting blood samples for measurement of reproductive hormones (eg, testosterone, estradiol, sex hormone-binding globulin, inhibin B) and other hormones (eg, C-peptide, insulin-like growth factor 1, leptin, dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate) known to change during adolescence. Spearman correlations (r) were calculated among the average rank of all hormones and self-assessed and physician-assessed Tanner stage. The method of triads was used to assess the validity of self-reports by estimating correlations between self-assessments and true but unobservable sexual maturation based on all available data. Bootstrap sampling was used to construct 95% CIs.
Results: The validity of self-reported genitalia staging for boys was modest (r = 0.50; 95% CI, 0.31-0.65) and inferior to physician assessment (r = 0.75; 95% CI, 0.56-0.93). Breast stage was well reported (r = 0.89; 95% CI, 0.79-0.97) and superior to physician assessment (r = 0.80; 95% CI, 0.70-0.89). Pubic hair stage reported by boys (r = 0.91; 95% CI, 0.79-0.99) and girls (r = 0.99; 95% CI, 0.96-1.00) was superior to physician assessment (r = 0.79; 95% CI, 0.57-0.97 and r = 0.91; 95% CI, 0.83-0.97, respectively).
Conclusion: Self-assessment can be validly used in epidemiologic studies for evaluating sexual maturation in children; however, physician assessment may be necessary for accurate assessment of genitalia development in boys.
Keywords: biomarkers; epidemiology; puberty; reproductive hormones; validation.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Figures
Comment in
-
Do it yourself.J Pediatr. 2017 Jul;186:3. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2017.05.013. J Pediatr. 2017. PMID: 28648279 No abstract available.
References
-
- Lee Y, Styne D. Influences on the onset and tempo of puberty in human beings and implications for adolescent psychological development. Hormones and Behav. 2013;64:250–61. - PubMed
-
- Parent AS, Teilmann G, Juul A, Skakkebaek NE, Toppari J, Bourguignon JP. The timing of normal puberty and the age limits of sexual precocity: variations around the world, secular trends, and changes after migration. Endocrine Rev. 2003;24:668–93. - PubMed
-
- Buck Louis GM, Gray LE, Jr, Marcus M, Ojeda SR, Pescovitz OH, Witchel SF, et al. Environmental factors and puberty timing: expert panel research needs. Pediatrics. 2008;121:S192–207. - PubMed
-
- Kaltiala-Heino R, Koivisto AM, Marttunen M, Frojd S. Pubertal timing and substance use in Middle Adolescence: A 2-year follow-up study. JYouth Adolesc. 2011;40:1288–301. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
