Validity of anogenital distance as a marker of in utero phthalate exposure
2006
Discussion on Anogenital Distance Study
Sample size: 134
publication
Evidence: low
Author Information
Author(s): Bailey John E., Renner Gerald
Conclusion
The study by Swan et al. is limited by its small sample size and lack of historical control data for determining normal anogenital distance values.
Supporting Evidence
- A value for 'normal' anogenital distance is not known.
- Without knowledge of normal AGD values, 'abnormal' AGD cannot be determined.
- The sample size of 134 boys is inadequate to determine a normal AGD value.
Takeaway
The study looked at how far apart boys' private parts are, but it didn't have enough kids to say what's normal.
Potential Biases
Authors are employed by advocacy groups representing the cosmetic industry, which may influence their perspective.
Limitations
The study's small sample size and lack of historical control data for AGD.
Participant Demographics
134 boys of varying age, height, and weight.
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website