Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39112679›Full record

ArticleCommunications medicine2024

Evaluation and comparison of nine growth and development-based measures of pubertal timing.

Ahmed Elhakeem, Monika Frysz, Ana Goncalves Soares, Joshua A Bell, Tim J Cole, Jon Heron, Laura D Howe, Sylvain Sebert, Kate Tilling, Nicholas J Timpson and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Communications medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Ahmed ElhakeemMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit at the University of Bristol, Bristol, UK. a.elhakeem@bristol.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7637-6360
Monika FryszMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit at the University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5729-778X
Ana Goncalves SoaresMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit at the University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2763-4647
Joshua A BellMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit at the University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Tim J ColeUCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5711-8200
Jon HeronMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit at the University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Laura D HoweMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit at the University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Sylvain SebertResearch Unit of Population Health, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6681-6983
Kate TillingMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit at the University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1010-8926
Nicholas J TimpsonMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit at the University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7141-9189
Deborah A LawlorMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit at the University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6793-2262

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPubertal timing is heritable, varies between individuals, and has implications for life-course health. There are many different indicators of pubertal timing, and how they relate to each other is unclear. Our aim was to quantitatively compare nine indicators of pubertal timing.

methodsWe used data from questionnaires and height, weight, and bone measurements from ages 7-17 y in a population-based cohort of 4267 females and 4251 males to compare nine growth and development-based indicators of pubertal timing. We summarise age of each indicator, their phenotypic and genetic correlations, and how they relate to established genetic risk score (GRS) for puberty timing, and phenotypic childhood body composition measures.

resultsWe show that pubic hair in males (mean: 12.6 y) and breasts in females (11.5 y) are early indicators of puberty, and voice breaking (14.2 y) and menarche (12.7 y) are late indicators however, there is substantial variation between individuals in pubertal age. All indicators show evidence of positive phenotypic intercorrelations (e.g., r = 0.49: male genitalia and pubic hair ages), and positive genetic intercorrelations. An age at menarche GRS positively associates with all other pubertal age indicators (e.g., difference in female age at peak height velocity per SD higher GRS: 0.24 y, 95%CI: 0.21 to 0.26), as does an age at voice breaking GRS (e.g., difference in age at male axillary hair: 0.11 y, 0.07 to 0.15). Higher childhood fat mass and lean mass associated with earlier puberty timing.

conclusionsOur findings provide insights into the measurements of the timing of pubertal growth and development and illustrate value of various pubertal timing indicators in life-course research.

Identifiers

PMID39112679
PMCPMC11306255

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.