Institute of Sports and Preventive Medicine, Saarland University, Saarbrücken, Germany.
TSG ResearchLab gGmbH, Zuzenhausen, Germany.
Ann Hum Biol. 2021 Mar;48(2):101-109. doi: 10.1080/03014460.2021.1913224.
The assessment of biological maturity status plays an important role in talent identification and development programs.
To compare age at predicted adult height and BAUS skeletal age as indicators of biological maturity status in youth soccer players using a construct-validity approach.
Participants were 114 players from the U12 to U17 age groups of a professional youth soccer academy. Maturity status was determined via percentage of predicted adult height based upon the Khamis-Roche method (somatic maturity) and assessed via the SonicBone BAUS system (skeletal maturity). Convergent and known-groups validity were evaluated between maturity assessment methods and by comparing maturity-related selection biases across age groups.
Although maturity status indicators were largely interrelated (r = .94, 95%CL 0.91-0.96), concordance (κ = 0.31 to 0.39) and Spearman's rank-order correlations (ρ = 0.45-0.52) of classification methods were moderate. A selection bias towards early maturing players emerged in the U14 age group which remained relatively consistent through to the U17 age group.
Results confirm the construct-validity of both methods to assess biological maturity status although further validation relative to established indicators of biological maturity is needed. Furthermore, caution is also warranted when interpreting maturity status classification methods interchangeably given the poor concordance between classification methods.
生物成熟度评估在人才选拔和发展计划中起着重要作用。
采用构效效度方法比较年龄预测成人身高和 BAUS 骨骼年龄作为青年足球运动员生物成熟度状态的指标。
参与者为来自专业青年足球学院 U12 至 U17 年龄组的 114 名球员。通过基于 Khamis-Roche 方法的预测成人身高百分比（体成熟度）和 SonicBone BAUS 系统（骨骼成熟度）来确定成熟度状态。通过比较成熟度评估方法之间以及在年龄组之间的成熟度相关选择偏差来评估收敛性和已知组有效性。
尽管成熟度状态指标之间存在很大的相关性（r=0.94，95%CL 0.91-0.96），但分类方法的一致性（κ=0.31 至 0.39）和 Spearman 等级相关系数（ρ=0.45-0.52）均为中等。在 U14 年龄组中出现了偏向早期成熟球员的选择偏差，这种偏差在 U17 年龄组中仍然相对一致。
结果证实了这两种方法在评估生物成熟度状态方面的构效效度，但需要进一步验证与生物成熟度的既定指标相对比。此外，鉴于分类方法之间的一致性较差，在互换使用成熟度状态分类方法时也需要谨慎。
