Home Current Issue Previous Issues Published Ahead-of-Print Collections For Authors Journal Info
Skip Navigation LinksHome > November 2002 - Volume 34 - Issue 11 > Validity of methods for analyzing urinary steroid data to de...
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise:
November 2002 - Volume 34 - Issue 11 - pp 1836-1844
APPLIED SCIENCES: Physical Fitness and Performance

Validity of methods for analyzing urinary steroid data to detect ovulation in athletes

MCCONNELL, HEATHER J.; O'CONNOR, KATHLEEN A.; BRINDLE, ELEANOR; WILLIAMS, NANCY I.

Collapse Box

Abstract

MCCONNELL, H. J., K. A. O'CONNOR, E. BRINDLE, and N. I. WILLIAMS. Validity of methods for analyzing urinary steroid data to detect ovulation in athletes. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc., Vol. 34, No. 11, pp. 1836-1844, 2002.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine whether the accuracy of ovulation detection algorithms is compromised when applied to menstrual cycles exhibiting subclinical hormonal abnormalities, which are particularly prevalent in female athletes.

Methods: The validity of five ovulation detection algorithms was compared between 25 regularly exercising women and 15 sedentary controls. Subjects collected daily urine samples for an entire menstrual cycle for analysis of estrone-3-glucuronide (E1G), pregnanediol-3-glucuronide (PDG), and luteinizing hormone (LH). The algorithms were applied to determine their sensitivity (% of true ovulatory cycles), specificity (% of true anovulatory cycles), and the deviation from the reference day of ovulation (difference scores).

Results: The sensitivity was > 80% in all algorithms except Baird's E1G/PDG ratio algorithm (74%) and Kassam's PDG ratio algorithm (78%). All algorithms, except Kassam's PDG ratio algorithm (80%), were found to exhibit specificities < 70%. Baird's E1G/PDG ratio algorithm was the most accurate in estimating the day of ovulation by deviating only -0.2 ± 0.3 d from the reference day in the exercising female cycles and -0.5 ± 0.3 d in the controls. No statistical differences in the sensitivities of the algorithms were found between the exercising and control cycles. When comparing the deviation from the reference day of ovulation between subject groups, no statistical difference was found.

Conclusion: The algorithms display similar validity in determining the presence and day of ovulation between subject groups, and thus may be applied to cycles exhibiting subclinical hormonal abnormalities as commonly observed in exercising women.

© 2002 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.

You currently do not have access to this article.

You may need to:

Note: If your society membership provides for full-access to this article, you may need to login on your society’s web site first.

Article Tools

You currently do not have access to this article.

You may need to:

Note: If your society membership provides for full-access to this article, you may need to login on your society’s web site first.

Search for Similar Articles
You may search for similar articles that contain these same keywords or you may modify the keyword list to augment your search.