Reliability and validity of computer-assisted estimates of tanner-whitehouse skeletal maturity (CASAS): Comparison with the manual method

James M. Tanner*, Dan Oshman, Gunilla Lindgren, Jo Anne Grunbaum, Rabih Elsouki, Darwin Labarthe

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

23 Scopus citations

Abstract

Three observers rated 57 X-rays from normal healthy children in Project HeartBeat! twice each by CASAS, the computer-assisted version of the TW2 RUS bone age method. Differences between duplicates of individual bone ratings which reached or exceeded 1.0 unit (or 1 stage) were 5% within observer and 8% between observers for CASAS, and 17 and 33%, respectively, for the unassisted MANUAL method. In children followed longitudinally, CASAS scores increased much more steadily than MANUAL scores, largely because the bones were rated, in the former system, on a continuous rather than a discrete-integer scale. We conclude that CASAS is a more reliable and probably a more valid estimator of skeletel maturity than the MANUAL version of the TW2 RUS method.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)288-294
Number of pages7
JournalHormone Research in Paediatrics
Volume42
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - 1994

Keywords

  • Bone age
  • Computer-assisted TW
  • Reliability
  • Skeletal maturity
  • Tanner-Whitehouse method
  • Validity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health
  • Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism
  • Endocrinology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Reliability and validity of computer-assisted estimates of tanner-whitehouse skeletal maturity (CASAS): Comparison with the manual method'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this