Evidence Hub

Bone mineral and calcium accretion during puberty

Martin AD, Bailey DA, McKay HA, Whiting S

The American journal of clinical nutrition, 1997

228 participants

Abstract

We measured bone mineral content (BMC) and estimated calcium accretion in children to provide insight into dietary calcium requirements during growth. Anthropometric measurements were done semiannually and whole-body BMC was measured annually by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry for 4 y in 228 children (471 scans in 113 boys and 507 scans in 115 girls). Mean values for BMC, skeletal area, and height were calculated for 1-y age groups from 9.5 to 19.5 y of age. Cross-sectional analysis of the pooled data gave peak height velocity and peak BMC velocity (PBMCV) and the ages at which these occurred (13.3 y in boys and 11.4 y in girls). PBMCV did not peak until 1.2 y after peak height velocity in boys and 1.6 y after peak height velocity in girls. Within 3 y on either side of PBMCV, boys had consistently higher BMC and BMC velocity compared with girls and the discrepancy increased steadily through puberty. Three years before PBMCV, BMC values in girls were 69% of those in boys; 3 y after peak height velocity this proportion fell to 51%. PBMCV was 320 g/y in boys and 240 g/y in girls. Under the assumption that bone mineral is 32.2% calcium, these values corresponded to a daily calcium retention of 282 mg in boys and 212 mg in girls. Individual values could be much greater. In one boy in a group of six subjects for whom there were enough data for individual analysis through puberty, PBMCV was 555 g Ca/y or 490 mg Ca/d. Such high skeletal demands for calcium require large dietary…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a clinical trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 228 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free