Search

Background: Accurate growth assessment of preterm infants is essential in guiding medical care and suitable nutritional interventions. Currently, different growth references are used across hospitals in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). This study aims to compare the INTERGROWTH-21st standards with Fenton growth references regarding birth size classification and at the time of discharge in a sample of preterm infants in the UAE. Methods: A retrospective single-center evaluation of medical records of infants born < 37 weeks of gestation was conducted using data from 2018 to 2020. Anthropometric measurements (weight, length, and head circumference) were obtained at birth and at the time of discharge, and then converted to percentiles according to the two reference standards. Results: A total of 1537 infants with a median birth gestation of 35.3 weeks, and a median birthweight of 2320 g were included. The rates of SGA, AGA, and LGA at birth were 11.5%, 80.42%, and 9.08% using INTERGROWTH-21st growth charts compared to 9.5%, 83.2%, and 7.3% respectively according to Fenton charts. The findings indicated statistically significant differences between the two growth charts classifying of preterm infants based on weight, length, and head circumference (p < 0.05). For every 5 cases assessed as SGA at discharge according to Fenton charts, only 3 were classified as SGA by INTERGROWTH-21st curves. Conclusions: Differences exist between the two growth charts with only moderate agreement. Thus, there is a need for harmonizing growth assessment standards. Misclassification of these vulnerable infants would affect their in-hospital and post-discharge nutrition and medical care plan. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Stunting remains a considerable public health problem globally, and sex differences in prevalence have been documented. While many risk factors for stunting have been identified, few studies examine how these factors may contribute to sex differences. We test whether: (1) boys and girls are differentially exposed to stunting risk factors, (2) boys and girls respond differently to similar exposures, and (3) these associations are sensitive to the growth measures used. Methods: Data comes from 7486 Zambian infants, aged 0–23 months, participating in the SUN (Scaling Up Nutrition) 2.0 Program baseline survey. Surveys and dietary recalls were collected from primary caregivers, and anthropometry was collected for caregivers and children. Stunting was defined as height-for-age z-score (HAZ) <-2. Descriptive statistics and adjusted multilevel logistic regression models controlling for age and province were used to identify sex differences in exposures and risk factors for stunting, respectively. Interaction terms between exposure and infant sex were added to test for sex differences in response. Sensitivity testing with alternate measures of infant size, including height-for-age difference (HAD), was conducted. Results: Boys were more likely to be stunted than girls (34.5% vs. 25.7%, respectively). Numerous maternal, care giving, diet, and household characteristics were associated with the risk of stunting, but few sex differences were seen in exposure to these factors. Only one risk factor—maternal marital status—showed evidence of moderation by sex at the p < 0.05 level, while a limited number of risk factors did so at the p < 0.10 level. At all ages, boys were longer than girls, and there were no sex-specific differences in the patterns of HAZ or HAD with age. Results were robust to alternate specifications. Conclusions: Our results show that Zambian boys have lower mean HAZ scores than girls and a greater prevalence of stunting throughout the first two years We do not find strong evidence that infant feeding practices, environmental exposures, or care giving differ consistently between boys and girls or that boys and girls respond differently to these exposures. Our results instead indicate that further investigation of prenatal factors and/or measurement issues is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Accurate growth assessment of preterm infants is essential in guiding medical care and suitable nutritional interventions. Currently, different growth references are used across hospitals in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). This study aims to compare the INTERGROWTH-21st standards with Fenton growth references regarding birth size classification and at the time of discharge in a sample of preterm infants in the UAE. Methods A retrospective single-center evaluation of medical records of infants born

Aim: This study aimed to address the critical need for more accurate growth reference charts for preterm infants, with a particular focus on low‐ and very low‐birth‐weight infants. Methods: The subjects were recruited at a single tertiary centre. The cohort comprised singleton and twin infants born before 37 weeks of gestation, with data collected from 2000 to 2016. Standardised measurements of body parameters were recorded in this mixed longitudinal survey. LMS method was utilised for data analysis. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS Statistics Version 21. The validation with another new cohort was executed. Results: A total of 1781 infants (52.5% boys) met the inclusion criteria. The median gestational age at birth was 30 weeks, with a median birth weight of 1350 grams. The main findings included the construction of ImaGrow charts for low‐ and very low‐birth‐weight infants and significant differences in growth trajectories compared to Fenton+WHO charts. Conclusion: Our comprehensive growth references, ImaGrow, are based on a long‐term auxological assessment of preterm infants and differ from charts derived from size‐at‐birth standards or charts for term babies. These charts have significant implications for clinical practice in monitoring and assessing the growth of preterm infants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: The overarching aim of this study was to evaluate the Norwegian guidelines for growth monitoring using routinely collected data from healthy children up to five years of age. We analysed criteria for both status (size for age) and change (centile crossing) in growth. Methods: Longitudinal data were obtained from the electronic health record (EHR) at the well-baby clinic for 2130 children included in the Bergen growth study 1 (BGS1). Measurements of length, weight, weight-for-length, body mass index (BMI) and head circumference were converted to z -scores and compared with the World Health Organization (WHO) growth standards and the national growth reference. Results: Using the WHO growth standard, the proportion of children above +2SD was generally higher than the expected 2.3% for all traits at birth and for length at all ages. Crossing percentile channels was common during the first two years of life, particularly for length/height. By the age of five years, 37.9% of the children had been identified for follow-up regarding length/height, 33% for head circumference and 13.6% for high weight-for-length/BMI. Conclusions: The proportion of children beyond the normal limits of the charts is higher than expected, and a surprisingly large number of children were identified for rules concerning length or growth in head circumference. This suggests the need for a revision of the current guidelines for growth monitoring in Norway. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: the variations in a child's overall body shape and figure among different countries are attributable to differences in genetics, environmental factors, and the interaction between these elements. This study aims to evaluate the validity, reliability, and appropriateness of applying international growth standards to Jordanian children and adolescents aged 2–19 years old. Methods: 65,828 Jordanian children and adolescents (43% males; 57% females) aged 2–19 years old were selected from the Hakeem Program database and various private schools across Jordan. Height-for-age, weight-for-age, and body mass index (BMI)-for-age were analyzed comparatively for Jordanian children and adolescents against international growth standards. The z-score for each record was computed based on international equations. Results: Mean z-scores for height-for-age, weight-for-age, and BMI-for-age for both genders showed significant deviation from international standards across most age intervals. It was found that in most age groups, Jordanian children and adolescents were shorter and lighter than CDC and WHO standards, except for females at ages ≥ 16 years, who were heavier with higher BMI-for-age values than CDC standards based on weight-for-age and BMI-for-age equations. Moreover, Jordanian males at ages ≥ 12 years had lower BMI-for-age values than CDC standards. Conclusions: Jordanian children and adolescents showed significant deviations in their measurements from international standards and growth reference values. The development of a population-specific growth chart is highly recommended to enhance the accuracy of evaluating children's and adolescents' wellness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: In 2006, the World Health Organization (WHO) introduced new growth standards based on data derived globally from optimally nourished breastfed infants. The aim of this study was to assess the effects of implementing WHO growth standards on the growth patterns of Jordanian infants. In addition, it was to ascertain the necessity of establishing country-specific growth standards and charts tailored to Jordanian infants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The data of 102,846 infants (50.1% boys, 49.9% girls) aged 0–24 months, from 115 primary healthcare centers across the country were retrieved from a National E-health Program. Weight and length measurements were analyzed, and age- and sex-specific z-scores were calculated relative to the WHO growth standards. Data was analyzed using SPSS version 26. Mann–Whitney U test was performed to determine significant differences between the measurements for boys and girls in terms of age, length, and weight. RESULTS: Jordanian infants exhibited significantly shorter length-for-age measurements than WHO standards with mean z-scores of −0.56 and −0.38, for boys and girls, respectively. Weight-for-age measurements showed a good fit and were comparable to the WHO growth standards for boys (mean z score = −0.05) and girls (mean z score = 0.04). Notably, Jordanian infants displayed higher weight-for-length measurements, with mean z-scores of 0.51 for boys and 0.47 for girls. CONCLUSION: The availability of Jordanian-specific growth standards will improve the accuracy of assessing infant growth and enhance the monitoring and evaluation of their health and development.

Copyright of Journal of Family & Community Medicine is the property of Wolters Kluwer India Pvt Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Anthropometric measurements are the first step in determining the health status in children and adolescents. Clinicians require standardized protocols for proper assessment and interpretation. Therefore, this study aims to review the literature of international and Saudi national guidelines and studies previously conducted in Saudi children and adolescents to provide recommendations to establish Saudi guidelines in line with the Saudi 2030 Vision. Systematic search was conducted in several databases: Medline, PubMed, Saudi Digital Library and Google Scholar from January 1990 to January 2021. Further, 167 studies measured anthropometrics in Saudi children/adolescents; 33 of these studies contributed to the establishment/adjustment of Saudi growth charts or specific cutoffs or studied the trend of growth in representative samples or adjusted the international curves to be used in Saudis. This review warrants updating growth charts and establishing the standard cutoffs of Saudi adolescent anthropometrics to avoid over/underreporting. This review provides insights and recommendations regarding the resources that can be used to establish national guidelines in anthropometric measurements for Saudi children/adolescents. This review will help policymakers and the Ministry of Health to establish standardized protocols to be used in Saudi Arabia for anthropometric measurements that may assist in detecting malnutrition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Growth charts are graphical representations of centile or standard deviation curves prepared from population-based studies. Growth charts are derived from large numbers of children either cross-sectionally or longitudinally. The variation in anthropometric measures amongst individuals of different ethnicities requires specific charts also for Indian children and need to be updated to reflect secular trends. Growth charts in India have come a long way from the development of first ones in the mid-1940s by National Institute of Nutrition (NIN) to Paediatrician Friendly IAP growth charts with mid-parental height and BMI tool. Indian BMI charts recommend overweight and obesity cut-offs for children to the adult equivalents of 23 and 27kg/m2 to prevent the under-diagnosis of obesity. Indian growth charts have been published for upper:lower segment ratios, Turner syndrome, waist circumference, height velocity and sitting height.

Childhood nutritional status serves as a lens through which nations and communities identify missed opportunities to improve health and wellbeing across the life cycle, as well as economic development and other related sectors. Countries have committed to the global nutrition targets endorsed by the World Health Assembly in 2012, which were included in the Sustainable Development Goals framework under the target to end all forms of malnutrition by 2030. The child malnutrition indicators for tracking countries' progress toward the agreed-upon targets are based on standard definitions of nutritional status against the widely adopted and used World Health Organization (WHO) Child Growth Standards. The standards were based on a sample of healthy breastfed infants and young children from diverse ethnic backgrounds and cultural settings as part of the WHO Multicentre Growth Reference Study. The WHO Child Growth Standards developed represent the best description of physiological growth for children aged <5 y. The standards depict normal early childhood growth under optimal environmental conditions and can be used to assess children everywhere, regardless of ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and type of feeding., (Copyright © 2024 World Health Organization. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Universal growth standards for under-five children, given the worldwide variation in healthy growth and several determinants of anthropometry, are imprecise measures of nutritional status, particularly when used cross-sectionally. In constructing the global-use WHO growth standard, linear growth differences between contributing sites and pooled mean were >0.2 SD in 37% of observations. Systematic reviews confirm even greater variability, notably amplified for weight-for-age and head-circumference-for-age metrics. Unsurprisingly, developed nations had higher, and LMICs lower, growth dimensions. Contextual growth references predict neonatal morbidities, pathological short stature, macrocephaly, cardiometabolic risk factors, and adult noncommunicable diseases better than the WHO standards. Child body composition also varies contextually, with greater adiposity despite comparable weights in South Asian populations. Thus, contextual references, though not the perfect solution, are better suited for everyday practice and nutrition policy. Growth standards should only be used as a screening for clinical judgments aided by precise biomarkers., (Copyright © 2024 World Health Organization. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Proper infant classification, particularly a preterm infant, as small or large for gestational age, is crucial to undertake activities to improve postnatal outcomes. This study aimed to assess the usability of the Fenton preterm growth charts to evaluate the anthropometric parameters of Polish preterm neonates. Material and methods: In this single-center, retrospective study data extracted from the medical documentation of preterm neonates born 2002-2013 were analyzed. Body weight, body length, and head circumference were evaluated and used to develop growth charts, which were compared with the reference Fenton growth charts. Results: This study included 3,205 preterm neonates, of whom 937 were born before 30 weeks of pregnancy. Overall, 11.04%, 3.3%, and 5.2% of neonates were below the 10th percentile on the Fenton charts for birth weight, body length, and head circumference, respectively. Only 26 (6.67%) of 390 analyzed anthropological parameters differed significantly between the study and the Fenton groups. Statistically significant differences between the study and the Fenton populations were found only in body length for both sexes, and in head circumference for female neonates. Conclusions: The growth charts developed in this study for a population of Polish preterm neonates corresponded to the Fenton charts in terms of birth weight but differed in terms of body length and head circumference. Our findings suggest the need to evaluate growth charts for Polish preterm newborns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To evaluate three birth-weight (BW) standards (Australian population-based, Fenton and INTERGROWTH-21st ) and three estimated-fetal-weight (EFW) standards (Hadlock, INTERGROWTH-21st and WHO) for classifying small-for-gestational age (SGA) and large-for-gestational age (LGA) and predicting adverse perinatal outcomes in preterm and term babies.Methods: This was a nationwide population-based study conducted on a total of 2.4 million singleton births that occurred from 24 + 0 to 40 + 6 weeks' gestation between 2004 and 2013 in Australia. The performance of the growth charts was evaluated according to SGA and LGA classification, and relative risk (RR) and diagnostic accuracy based on the areas under the receiver-operating-characteristics curves (AUCs) for stillbirth, neonatal death, perinatal death, composite morbidity and a composite of perinatal death and morbidity outcomes. The analysis was stratified according to gestational age at delivery (< 37 + 0 vs ≥ 37 + 0 weeks).Results: Following exclusions, 2 392 782 singleton births were analyzed. There were significant differences in the SGA and LGA classification and risk of adverse outcomes between the six BW and EFW standards evaluated. For the term group, compared with the other standards, the INTERGROWTH-21st BW and EFW standards classified half the number of SGA (< 10th centile) babies (3-4% vs 7-11%) and twice the number of LGA (> 90th centile) babies (24-25% vs 8-15%), resulting in a smaller cohort of term SGA at higher risk of adverse outcome and a larger LGA cohort at lower risk of adverse outcome. For term SGA (< 3rd centile) babies, the RR of perinatal death using the two INTERGROWTH-21st standards was up to 1.5-fold higher than those of the other standards (including the WHO-EFW and Hadlock-EFW), while the INTERGROWTH-21st -EFW standard indicated a 12-26% reduced risk of perinatal death for LGA cases across centile thresholds. Conversely, for the preterm group, the WHO-EFW and Hadlock-EFW standards identified a higher SGA classification rate than did the other standards (18-19% vs 10-11%) and a 20-65% increased risk of perinatal death in term LGA babies. All BW and EFW charts had similarly poor performance in predicting adverse outcomes, including the composite outcome (AUC range, 0.49-0.62) for both preterm (AUC range, 0.58-0.62) and term (AUC range, 0.49-0.50) cases and across centiles. Furthermore, specific centile thresholds for identifying adverse outcomes varied markedly by chart between BW and EFW standards.Conclusions: This study addresses the recurrent problem of identifying fetuses at risk of morbidity and perinatal mortality associated with growth disorders and provides new insights into the applicability of international growth standards. Our findings of marked variation in classification and the similarly poor performance of prescriptive international standards and the other commonly used standards raise questions about whether the prescriptive international standards that were constructed for universal adoption are indeed applicable to a multiethnic population such as that of Australia. Thus, caution is needed when adopting universal standards for clinical and epidemiological use. © 2020 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Accurate assessment of fetal size is essential in providing optimal prenatal care. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) study from 2015 demonstrated that estimated fetal weight (EFW) differed significantly by race/ethnicity after 20 weeks. There is a large Somali population residing in Minnesota, many of whom are cared for at our maternal fetal medicine practice at the University of Minnesota. Anecdotally, we noticed an increased proportion of small-for-gestational age diagnoses within this population. We sought to use our ultrasound data to create a reference standard specific for this population and compare to currently applied references.Purpose: We aimed to model fetal growth standards within a healthy Somali population between 16 and 40 weeks gestation, and address possible differences in the growth patterns compared with standards for non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic, and Asian singleton fetuses published by the NICHD in the Fetal Growth Study.Materials and Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study using ultrasound data from 527 low risk pregnancies of Somali ethnicity at single tertiary care center between 2011 and 2017. A total of 1107 scans were identified for these pregnancies and maternal and obstetrical data were reviewed. Women 18-40 years of age with low-risk pregnancies and established dating consistent with first trimester ultrasound scan were included. Exclusion criteria were any maternal, fetal or obstetrical conditions known to affect fetal growth.Results: Estimated fetal weight among Somali pregnancies differed significantly at some time points from the NICHD four ethnic groups, but generally the EFW graph curves crossed over at most time points between the study groups. At week 18, EFW was significantly larger than all other four ethnic groups (all p<.001), it was also significantly larger from the Hispanic, Black, and Asian ethnic groups at some time points between 18 and 27 weeks gestation (p < .05). Additionally, EFW among Somali pregnancies was significantly smaller than the Black and Asian ethnicity at 32 and 35-36 weeks and smaller than the White ethnicity at 30 and 38-39 weeks (p < .05). Abdominal circumference (AC) for the Somali population was significantly smaller than the other ethnic groups, especially than the White ethnicity at various time points across 16-40 weeks (p < .05). Femur and humerus length were significantly longer when compared to all other ethnic groups at most time points from 16 to 40 weeks of gestation (p < .05). Biparietal diameter (BPD) was significantly smaller than all other ethnic groups specifically at time of fetal survey (18 weeks) and at time of fetal growth assessment (32 weeks) (p < .05).Conclusions: Significant differences in fetal growth standards were found between the Somali ethnicity and other ethnic groups (White, Black, Asian, and Hispanic) at various time points from 16 to 40 weeks of gestation. Racial/ethnic-specific standards improve the precision for evaluating fetal growth and may decrease the proportion of fetuses of Somali ethnicity labeled as small-for-gestational age. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The current national growth and development standard of preschool children in China was formulated in 2003, which has many deficiencies. It is necessary to construct more scientific percentile curve and growth reference standards in order to evaluate more effectively the growth, development and health status of Chinese children. Methods: Based on the physical and health data of 31 provinces in China measured in 2010 and 2014, the GAMLSS model was used to construct the growth reference standard and correlation curve. Results: We obtained growth reference standards for percentile curve and Z-score curve of height-for-age, sitting height-for-age, Weight-for-age, Chest circumference-for-age of Chinese preschool children. The C50 percentile of all indicators showed an obvious increasing trend with aged 3.0 to 6.5. Such as, the height of boys and girls increased by 21.1cm and 20.3cm respectively, the sitting height boys and girls increased by 10.3cm and 10.1cm respectively, the weight of boys and girls increased by 7.1 kg and 6.3 kg respectively, the Chest circumference of boys and girls increased by 6cm and 5.2 cm respectively. Conclusion: The children's growth and development charts provided in this study provide effective monitoring and personalized evaluation tools for the growth and development assessment of preschool children, as well as for the reduction of malnutrition, prevention and control of childhood obesity. It is recommended to be used in some areas such as child health, medical treatment and public health.

Child growth standards are commonly used to derive age- and sex-standardized anthropometric indices but are often inappropriately applied to preterm-born children (<37 weeks of gestational age (GA)) in epidemiology studies. Using the 2004 Pelotas Birth Cohort, we examined the impact of correcting for GA in the application of child growth standards on the magnitude and direction of associations in 2 a priori–selected exposure-outcome scenarios: infant length-for-age z score (LAZ) and mid-childhood body mass index (scenario A), and infant LAZ and mid-childhood intelligence quotient (scenario B). GA was a confounder that had a strong (scenario A) or weak (scenario B) association with the outcome. Compared with uncorrected postnatal age, using GA-corrected postnatal age attenuated the magnitude of associations, particularly in early infancy, and changed inferences for associations at birth. Although differences in the magnitude of associations were small when GA was weakly associated with the outcome, model fit was meaningfully improved using corrected postnatal age. When estimating population-averaged associations with early childhood growth in studies where preterm- and term-born children are included, incorporating heterogeneity in GA at birth in the age scale used to standardize anthropometric indices postnatally provides a useful strategy to reduce standardization errors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: The aim was to compare the performances of the World Health Organization (WHO) and population‐based (PB) references in the screening for hydrocephalus in infants aged <2 years. Methods: We collected 341 longitudinal head circumference (HC) measurements of hydrocephalic infants and 120 181 measurements of 15 145 healthy infants from primary care. The measurements were converted into z‐scores, and a new screening parameter, change in HC standard deviation score (SDS) over time (ΔHC SDS), was calculated. Comparisons were made using receiver operating characteristics analysis and linear mixed models. Results: The mean HC SDSWHO was 3.5 and the mean HC SDSPB was 2.9 in the hydrocephalic infants, and in healthy children, those numbers were 1.0 SDSWHO and 0 SDSPB, respectively. The best screening accuracy was obtained with the PB reference in combination with the ΔHC SDS parameter (AUC 0.89). The accuracy of the WHO standard could be improved to a similar level by customising the screening cut‐offs of HC SDS according to the population and combining screening parameters. Conclusions: Auxology alone was not sufficient for the screening of hydrocephalus. The WHO standard should be validated in the population, and population‐specific cut‐offs for normality defined before its introduction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background In order to make further gains in preventing newborn deaths, effective interventions are needed. Ultrasounds and newborn anthropometry are proven interventions to identify preterm birth complications, the leading cause of newborn deaths. The INTERGROWTH-21st global gestational dating and fetal and newborn growth standards prescribe optimal growth in any population. Jacaranda Health in Kenya was the first low-resource health facility to implement the standards and evaluate their feasibility and acceptability. Objective To capture patients’ perceptions of ultrasound and newborn care before and during implementation of the INTERGROWTH-21st standards. Methods The study was conducted over two years before and during the introduction of the INTERGROWTH-21st standards. Fifty pregnant and/or newly delivered women were selected for in-depth interviews and focus group discussions using convenience and purposive sampling. Interviews were conducted by research assistants using semi-structured guides once in the pre-implementation phase and twice in the implementation phase. Interviews were transcribed, double-coded by two independent researchers and thematically analyzed together. Demographic information was obtained from hospital records. Results Patients reported being generally satisfied with ultrasound care when providers communicated effectively. Women reported a priority for ultrasound was that it allowed them to feel reassured. However, a clear need for better pre-screening information emerged consistently from patients. Women noted that factors facilitating their choosing to have an ultrasound included ensuring the well-being of the fetus and learning the sex. Barriers included wait times and financial constraints. Patients were generally satisfied with care using the newborn standards. Conclusions As the INTERGROWTH-21st standards are implemented worldwide, understanding ways to facilitate implementation is critical. Increased and standardized communication about ultrasound should be provided before the procedure to increase satisfaction and uptake. Considering patient perspectives when integrating new standards or guidelines into routine clinical care will inform effective strategies in care provision, thus improving maternal and newborn health and survival.

Abstract Background Assessment of child growth is important in detecting under- and over-growth. We aimed to examine the growth patterns of healthy Chinese infants from birth to 24 months. Methods This study was based on six recent birth cohorts across China, which provided data (from 2015) on 4251 children (2174 boys, 2077 girls) who were born at term to mothers without gestational or preexisting diabetes, chronic hypertension, preeclampsia, or eclampsia. Analyses were performed using 28,298 longitudinal anthropometric measures in 4251 children and the LMS method to generate smoothed Z-score growth curves, which were compared to the WHO growth standards (which are based on data from 2003) and current Chinese growth references (which are based on data from 2005). Results Most (80.3%) of mother had college education or more, and maternal smoking was rare (0.4%). Compared to the WHO longitudinal growth standards for children aged 0 to 2 years, the growth references from this longitudinal study (length-, weight-, head circumference-, BMI-for-age, and weight-for-length) were significantly higher, for boys and girls; Specifically, the median length-, weight-, head circumference-, BMI-for-age, and weight-for-length was on average 0.9 (range 0.2–1.3) cm, 0.51 (range 0.09–0.74) kg, 0.17 (range − 0.24 to 0.37) cm, 0.70 (range 0.01 to 0.92) kg/m2, and 0.43 (range 0.01 to 1.07) kg higher in Chinese boys, and 1.3 (range 0.5–1.9) cm, 0.73 (range 0.10–0.91) kg, 0.45 (range 0.15–0.62) cm, 0.7 (range 0.0 to 1.0) kg/m2, and 0.42 (range 0.00 to 0.64) kg greater in Chinese girls, respectively. Compared to the current China cross-sectional growth references (based on data from a decade ago), growth references from this study were also higher, but the difference was less than that between growth references of this study and WHO growth standards. Conclusions This recent multicenter prospective birth cohort study examined early growth patterns in China. The new growth curves represent the growth patterns of healthy Chinese infants evaluated longitudinally from 0 to 24 months of age, and provide references for monitoring growth in early life in modern China that are more recent than WHO longitudinal growth standards from other countries and previous cross-sectional growth references for China.

Background: Offspring of women with type 1 diabetes are at increased risk of fetal growth patterns which are associated with perinatal morbidity. Our aim was to compare rates of large- and small-for-gestational age (LGA; SGA) defined according to different criteria, using data from the Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Type 1 Diabetes Pregnancy Trial (CONCEPTT).Methods: This was a pre-specified analysis of CONCEPTT involving 225 pregnant women and liveborn infants from 31 international centres ( ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01788527; registered 11/2/2013). Infants were weighed immediately at birth and GROW, INTERGROWTH and WHO centiles were calculated. Relative risk ratios, sensitivity and specificity were used to assess the different growth standards with respect to perinatal outcomes, including neonatal hypoglycaemia, hyperbilirubinaemia, respiratory distress, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission and a composite neonatal outcome.Results: Accelerated fetal growth was common, with mean birthweight percentiles of 82.1, 85.7 and 63.9 and LGA rates of 62, 67 and 30% using GROW, INTERGROWTH and WHO standards respectively. Corresponding rates of SGA were 2.2, 1.3 and 8.9% respectively. LGA defined according to GROW centiles showed stronger associations with preterm delivery, neonatal hypoglycaemia, hyperbilirubinaemia and NICU admission. Infants born > 97.7th centile were at highest risk of complications. SGA defined according to INTERGROWTH centiles showed slightly stronger associations with perinatal outcomes.Conclusions: GROW and INTERGROWTH standards performed similarly and identified similar numbers of neonates with LGA and SGA. GROW-defined LGA and INTERGROWTH-defined SGA had slightly stronger associations with neonatal complications. WHO standards underestimated size in preterm infants and are less applicable for use in type 1 diabetes.Trial Registration: This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov . number NCT01788527 . Trial registered 11/2/2013. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: The World Health Organization (WHO) published universal growth standards for children below five year of age in 2006. Traditionally, Swedish growth references have been used to monitor growth of children in Iceland, but it is not yet known how they compare with these reference charts.Methods: A total of 2128 longitudinal measurements of length or height, 2132 of weight and 2126 of head circumference between birth and four years of age were collected in 1996-2000 from 199 healthy children (53% boys) recruited at Landspitali University Hospital. Measurements were converted to z-scores using the WHO growth standards and Swedish growth references for further analysis with mixed-effects models.Results: Length or height, weight and in particular head circumference largely exceeded the WHO standards, with average z-scores that fluctuated between 0.5 and 1.5. Likewise, the proportion of children with a z-score larger than 2 SD increased about 10-fold. Icelandic children were longer and heavier than their Swedish peers during the first six months of life, but differences were less pronounced thereafter.Conclusion: The growth of Icelandic children deviated significantly from the WHO growth standards. Although more comparable to the Swedish references, significant differences were found, suggesting that a national growth reference would be more appropriate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: We aimed to establish a reference standard of Body Mass Index (BMI) for the growth of preschool children in China. Methods: We monitored and obtained the height and weight of 50702 children aged 3-6 yr in 31 provinces in mainland China in 2014. The reference standard and percentile curve of BMI preschool children aged 3-6 yr old were formulated by using Lambda-Median-Sigma (LMS) method in China. Results: The common grounds of the male and female children were as follows: the percentile maps were similar in shape; the graphs of children aged 4-6 were approximately horn shaped. The differences between male and female children were as follows: the BMI values of male children in the same age group and the same percentile were higher than those of the female children. The change pattern of male children was larger than that of female children. BMI of 3 yr old and 6 yr old children was larger than those of 4 yr old and 5 yr old. During the change from low percentile to high percentile, the BMI values of Chinese male children exceeded WHO to a larger extent, and the BMI values of Chinese female children were substantially consistent with WHO, but the high percentile greater than P95 exceeded WHO. Conclusion: The BMI growth chart developed can be applied in monitoring the growth and nutrition of preschool children in China. We recommend the promotion of the results in the field of preventive health care.

In order to make further gains in preventing newborn deaths, effective interventions are needed. Ultrasounds and newborn anthropometry are proven interventions to identify preterm birth complications, the leading cause of newborn deaths. The INTERGROWTH-21st global gestational dating and fetal and newborn growth standards prescribe optimal growth in any population. Jacaranda Health in Kenya was the first low-resource health facility to implement the standards and evaluate their feasibility and acceptability. To capture patients’ perceptions of ultrasound and newborn care before and during implementation of the INTERGROWTH-21st standards. The study was conducted over two years before and during the introduction of the INTERGROWTH-21st standards. Fifty pregnant and/or newly delivered women were selected for in-depth interviews and focus group discussions using convenience and purposive sampling. Interviews were conducted by research assistants using semi-structured guides once in the pre-implementation phase and twice in the implementation phase. Interviews were transcribed, double-coded by two independent researchers and thematically analyzed together. Demographic information was obtained from hospital records. Patients reported being generally satisfied with ultrasound care when providers communicated effectively. Women reported a priority for ultrasound was that it allowed them to feel reassured. However, a clear need for better pre-screening information emerged consistently from patients. Women noted that factors facilitating their choosing to have an ultrasound included ensuring the well-being of the fetus and learning the sex. Barriers included wait times and financial constraints. Patients were generally satisfied with care using the newborn standards. As the INTERGROWTH-21st standards are implemented worldwide, understanding ways to facilitate implementation is critical. Increased and standardized communication about ultrasound should be provided before the procedure to increase satisfaction and uptake. Considering patient perspectives when integrating new standards or guidelines into routine clinical care will inform effective strategies in care provision, thus improving maternal and newborn health and survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Previous studies have found high rates of stunted linear growth in Greenlandic children. We measured growth patterns in Greenland and compared them with international growth charts.Methods: The study cohort comprised 279 healthy children aged 6-10 years in 2012. They participated in two pregnancy and birth cohorts in Greenland and longitudinal growth data as birth was extracted from their medical records. Growth reference ranges were estimated with the lambda-mu-sigma (LMS) method and compared with growth charts from Denmark and the World Health Organization (WHO).Results: The children's mean length, weight and head circumference were significantly larger than the WHO growth charts (p < 0.001). We found that 21-28% of the children aged zero to one years exceeded the WHO growth chart for length by more than two standard deviations. For weight and head circumference, 9-16% of the children aged 0-10 years and 9-11% of the children from zero to two years exceeded the WHO charts by more than two standard deviations. The Danish references were exceeded to a lesser degree.Conclusion: This study showed that the growth of Greenlandic children up to 10 years was no longer stunted. Major determining factors suggested are genetic admixture, maternal overweight, changes in nutrition and improved health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: This study aimed to compare the recently published prescriptive INTERGROWTH-21st standards with commonly used intrauterine based Fenton growth standards in terms of birth size classification and extrauterine growth restriction (EUGR) incidence in a sample of very preterm infants.Methods: The anthropometric measures of preterm infants born before 32 weeks of gestation at the Dokuz Eylul University Hospital during the period from January 2012 to February 2016 were obtained at birth, at the 36th gestational weeks or at the time of discharge. Birth and growth data were presented as percentiles according to the two reference standards.Results: A total of 248 infants with mean gestational age of 29.1 ± 2.1 weeks were included. The small for gestational age (SGA) rate was significantly higher (12 versus 15%, p = .004) and the EUGR rate was significantly lower (40.2 versus 31.5%, p < .001) with the INTERGROWTH-21st charts compared with the Fentons'. Twenty-four per cent of the infants who were accepted as SGA according to the INTERGROWTH-21st standards were appropriate for gestational age (AGA) according to the Fenton preterm growth charts. However, these newly identified SGA infants according to the Intergrowth-21st standards did not have increased risks of early morbidities. Furthermore, 77% of the cases who had EUGR due to the Fenton standards were categorized as EUGR when evaluated using the INTERGROWTH-21st standards.Conclusions: Results indicated that almost one out of every five cases assessed as EUGR according to Fenton standards was within the normal interval according to Intergrowth standards. On the contrary, one out of every four cases assessed as SGA according to the INTERGROWTH-21st standards was within the normal interval according to Fentons'. These differences observed with INTERGROWTH-21st standards may affect in-hospital and postdischarge nutrition plan of these vulnerable infants. However, new standards are needed to be evaluated against currently used ones before they are implemented and further studies should be conducted to evaluate the functional impact of these differences on long-term outcomes including neurologic and cardio-metabolic morbidities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The question of whether universal growth charts can be used in multi-ethnic settings is of general interest. The Intergrowth-21st fetal growth and newborn size standards are suggested to represent optimal fetal growth regardless of country origin. Our aim was to examine whether women fulfilling the strict Intergrowth-21st inclusion criteria were healthier, showed less ethnic differences in fetal growth and newborn size, and less adverse perinatal outcomes.Material and Methods: Data were drawn from a population-based multi-ethnic cohort of 823 presumably healthy pregnant women in Oslo, Norway. We assessed differences in fetal and neonatal gestational age specific z-scores and compared maternal health parameters, pregnancy and birth complications between pregnancies fulfilling and not fulfilling the Intergrowth-21st criteria.Results: Only 21% of pregnancies enrolled in our cohort fulfilled the Intergrowth-21st criteria. Fetal growth deviated substantially from the new standards, in particular for ethnic Europeans. Ethnic differences persisted in pregnancies fulfilling the criteria. In South Asian fetuses, estimated fetal weight was -0.60 SD (95% confidence interval -1.00, -0.20) lower at 24 gestational weeks, and birthweight was -0.62 SD (-0.95, -0.29) lower, compared with ethnic Europeans. Corresponding numbers for Middle-East/North Africans were -0.13 (-0.62, 0.36) and -0.60 (-1.00, -0.20). Maternal health indicators and birth complications were similar in women fulfilling and not fulfilling the criteria, but the relation depended on ethnic origin.Conclusions: In an urban multi-ethnic Norwegian population, applying an extensive list of criteria to define "healthy" pregnancies excludes the majority of women but does not cancel ethnic differences in fetal growth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Overweight and obesity in preschool-aged children are major health concerns. Accurate and reliable estimates of prevalence are necessary to direct public health and clinical interventions. There are currently three international growth standards used to determine prevalence of overweight and obesity, each using different methodologies: Center for Disease Control (CDC), World Health Organization (WHO) and International Obesity Task Force (IOTF). Adoption and use of each method were examined through a systematic review of Australian population studies (2006-2017). For this period, systematically identified population studies ( N = 20) reported prevalence of overweight and obesity ranging between 15 and 38% with most ( n = 16) applying the IOTF standards. To demonstrate the differences in prevalence estimates yielded by the IOTF in comparison to the WHO and CDC standards, methods were applied to a sample of N = 1,926 Australian children, aged 3-5 years. As expected, the three standards yielded significantly different estimates when applied to this single population. Prevalence of overweight/obesity was WHO - 9.3%, IOTF - 21.7% and CDC - 33.1%. Judicious selection of growth standards, taking account of their underpinning methodologies and provisions of access to study data sets to allow prevalence comparisons, is recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To evaluate if there are departures from the WHO Child Growth Standards (WHO-CGS) in postnatal growth of healthy 'Canadian' children in Ontario up to age 2 years, including by infant feeding and ethnicity.Methods: We included data on 9964 healthy, singleton children born in Ontario, Canada. Smoothed weight, length and body mass index (BMI) percentile curves were generated using quantile regression for the Canadian cohort from birth to age 2 years. Differences in percentile values were calculated comparing Canadian children vs. the WHO-CGS.Results: Canadian children under age 2 years were longer than the WHO-CGS at the 10th (0.8 cm), 50th (1.3 cm) and 90th (1.9 cm) percentiles. Canadian children incrementally surpassed the WHO-CGS in weight after age 6 months, and in BMI after 9 months. By age 2 years, the 50th percentile weight of Canadian males was 823 g (95% confidence interval (CI) 680, 965) higher than the WHO-CGS 50th percentile. Weight differences were seen regardless of feeding practice, and were greatest among children of mothers born in Canada and Europe/Western nations, and least for those of East Asian/Pacific or South Asian heritage. Among Canadian breastfed males, 18% (95% CI 16, 19) of newborns and 26% (95% CI 20, 33) toddlers aged 2 years were classified by WHO-CGS as weighing >90th percentile - much higher than the expected rate of 10%. Similarities were seen for differences in BMI.Conclusions: Healthy Canadian infants/toddlers are longer and heavier than the WHO-CGS norms. Explanations for these discrepancies require further elucidation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Early childhood growth status has been used to predict long-term clinical outcomes in Cystic Fibrosis (CF) patients. Adulthood CF outcomes based on early weight-for-length (WFL) measurements, using either World Health Organization (WHO) or Centers for Disease Control (CDC) scales, have not been compared. Methods Cystic Fibrosis Foundation registry patients were studied (n = 3014). Participants were categorized at age two years as WFL < 50th percentile on both WHO and CDC scales, ≥ 50th percentile on WHO but not CDC, or ≥ 50th percentile on both. Pulmonary function and overall survival were assessed at age 18 years. Results Stepwise gains in pulmonary function and lung transplant-free survival were noted across the three increasing WFL categories. Conclusions Children with CF who achieve higher WFL at age two years have improved pulmonary and survival outcomes into adulthood. CF providers should continue to utilize current early growth recommendations, with goal WFL ≥ 50th percentile on CDC growth charts before age two. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Each year, hundreds of articles in population health and nutrition, many in high-profile journals, use standard cutoffs based on weight and height as assessments of obesity and undernutrition. These global efforts to monitor overweight and underweight often rest on the assumption that ethnic differences in underlying body form are sufficiently small to permit universal anthropometric cutoffs for comparing excess and insufficient body fat across populations. However, a century of work in human biological variation suggests that human populations can vary dramatically in underlying body form in a way that may require population-sensitive cutoffs for monitoring. Here, we describe recently developed methods that can provide population-sensitive assessments of both excess and insufficient energy reserves in a wide range of countries. We use this approach to illustrate how worldwide variation in human body form is far more widespread than previously thought, and that it can occur at several geographic scales, including the level of world regions, countries and populations within countries. The findings also suggest that using standard cutoffs that ignore this variation can underestimate current obesity levels in adults by more than 400-500 million while also incorrectly prioritizing high-risk areas for undernutrition in children in key regions around the world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Growth references are important for paediatric health monitoring. It is critical to understand differences in growth interpretation and potential consequences when using available growth references. This study compares the growth of Czech breastfed children with the current WHO growth standards 2006 and the Czech references 1991,2001. A total of 960 infant/parent pairs in the Czech Republic were recruited through paediatric practices. Anthropometric data were collected during infants' first 12 months of life and parent questionnaires were gathered during a preventive visit at 18 months. Czech breastfed infants were longer with a greater head circumference at all percentiles compared to the WHO standards and were similar to the national references. The percentile weight-for-age and weight-for-length values of infants (≥6 months) were lower, and higher (6-12 months) compared to the WHO standards. The infant growth in the sample differed from both the WHO standards as well as the national references. Our findings indicate that the growth of Czech breastfed children differs from the current national references. These discrepancies were smaller compared to the WHO standards. The results of the study were used for new growth assessment guidelines to optimize feeding recommendations for Czech infants. The adoption of the WHO standards in the Czech Republic is not recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Childhood obesity is associated with increased risk of adult obesity, cardiovascular disease, diabetes and cancer. Appropriate techniques for assessment of childhood adiposity are required to identify children at risk. The aim of this review was to examine core clinical measurements and more technical tools to assess paediatric adiposity. Methods: The online databases PubMed, CINALH and EMBASE were searched and the abstracts identified were reviewed to determine appropriate studies. Their reference lists were also searched to identify further eligible studies. Publications were included if they described childhood measurement techniques or involved validation. Results and Discussion: There are many body composition assessment tools available, none of which are direct. Each technique has limitations and a combination of methods may be used. The main clinical techniques are weight, height, body mass index (BMI) and circumferences which provide sufficient information to enable classification of overweight or obesity when growth centile charts and ratios are employed. Further investigation depends on resources available and examiner skill. Skinfold thicknesses are cost-effective but require technical training and only measure subcutaneous fat. Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA), air displacement plethysmography (ADP), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT) are more costly and intensive, requiring the child to remain still for longer periods. DEXA and ADP are capable of accurately measuring adiposity but are unable to distinguish between fat depots. MRI and CT can distinguish intra-abdominal from subcutaneous adiposity and are considered gold standards, but CT is unsuitable for adiposity measurement in children due to high levels of radiation exposure. Ultrasound is a promising technique capable of measuring intra-abdominal adiposity in children but requires further validation. Conclusion: The core clinical measurements of weight, height, BMI and circumferences are sufficient to enable diagnosis of paediatric overweight and obesity while more technical tools provide further insight. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The diagnosis of abnormal fetal abdominal circumference is based on values >90th or <10th percentile. There are dozens of established norms that can be used to determine the percentile of a given abdominal circumference measurement, but there is no established method to determine which norms should be used., Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the applicability of 5 established abdominal circumference norms to our measurements and to determine which, if any, should be used for the diagnosis of abnormal fetal abdominal circumference., Study Design: Data were pooled from 6 maternal-fetal medicine practices to conduct a cross-sectional study. The inclusion criteria were a singleton fetus at 22.0 to 39.9 weeks of gestation with cardiac activity present, complete fetal biometry measured, and examination from 2019 or 2020. For patients with >1 eligible examination during the study period, a single examination was chosen at random for inclusion. Five norms of abdominal circumference were studied: the Hadlock formula, the World Health Organization Fetal Growth Curves, the International Fetal and Newborn Growth Consortium for the 21st-Century Project; and the National Institutes of Child Health and Human Development Fetal Growth Studies (fetuses of White patients and unified standard). Using formulas relating abdominal circumference to gestational age, we calculated the z scores of abdominal circumference (standard deviations from the mean), standard deviation of the z score, Kolmogorov-Smirnov D statistic, and relative mean squared error. The 5 norms were assessed for fit to our data based on 6 criteria: mean z score close to 0, standard deviation of the z score close to 1, low D statistic, low mean squared error, fraction of values >90th percentile close to 10%, and fraction of values <10th percentile close to 10%., Results: The inclusion criteria were met in 40,684 ultrasound examinations in 15,042 patients. Considering the 6 evaluation criteria, observed abdominal circumferences had the best fit to the World Health Organization standard (mean z score of 0.11±1.05, D statistic of 0.041, mean squared error of 0.84±1.46, 13% of examinations >90th percentile, and 7% of examinations <10th percentile). The Hadlock reference had an anomaly in its assumption of a constant standard deviation, resulting in the underdiagnosis of abnormal values at early gestational ages and overdiagnosis at late gestational ages. The International Fetal and Newborn Growth Consortium for the 21st-Century Project standard had a mean circumference smaller than all the other norms, resulting in the underdiagnosis of small circumferences and the overdiagnosis of large circumferences. Similar results were observed when restricting the analyses to a low-risk subgroup of 5487 examinations without identified risk factors for large for gestational age or small for gestational age., Conclusion: The diagnosis of abnormal abdominal circumference depends on the norms used to define abdominal circumference percentiles. The World Health Organization standard had the best fit for our data., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In 2006 WHO presented the infant and child growth charts suggested for universal application. However, major determinants for perinatal outcomes and postnatal growth are laid down during antenatal development. Accordingly, monitoring fetal growth in utero by ultrasonography is important both for clinical and scientific reasons. The currently used fetal growth references are derived mainly from North American and European population and may be inappropriate for international use, given possible variances in the growth rates of fetuses from different ethnic population groups. WHO has, therefore, made it a high priority to establish charts of optimal fetal growth that can be recommended worldwide. Methods: This is a multi-national study for the development of fetal growth standards for international application by assessing fetal growth in populations of different ethnic and geographic backgrounds. The study will select pregnant women of high-middle socioeconomic status with no obvious environmental constraints on growth (adequate nutritional status, non-smoking), and normal pregnancy history with no complications likely to affect fetal growth. The study will be conducted in centres from ten developing and industrialized countries: Argentina, Brazil, Democratic Republic of Congo, Denmark, Egypt, France, Germany, India, Norway, and Thailand. At each centre, 140 pregnant women will be recruited between 8 + 0 and 12 + 6 weeks of gestation. Subsequently, visits for fetal biometry will be scheduled at 14, 18, 24, 28, 32, 36, and 40 weeks (+/- 1 week) to be performed by trained ultrasonographers. The main outcome of the proposed study will be the development of fetal growth standards (either global or population specific) for international applications. Discussion: The data from this study will be incorporated into obstetric practice and national health policies at country level in coordination with the activities presently conducted by WHO to implement the use of the Child Growth Standards. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Healthy growth in utero and after birth is fundamental for lifelong health and wellbeing. The World Health Organization (WHO) recently published standards for healthy growth from birth to 6 years of age; analogous standards for healthy fetal growth are not currently available. Current fetal growth charts in use are not true standards, since they are based on cross-sectional measurements of attained size under conditions that do not accurately reflect normal growth. In most cases, the pregnant populations and environments studied are far from ideal; thus the data are unlikely to reflect optimal fetal growth. A true standard should reflect how fetuses and newborns 'should' grow under ideal environmental conditions. Objective The development of prescriptive intrauterine and newborn growth standards derived from the INTERGROWTH-21st Project provides the data that will allow us for the first time to establish what is 'normal' fetal growth. Methods The INTERGROWTH-21st study centres provide the data set obtained under pre-established standardised criteria, and details of the methods used are also published. Design Multicentre study with sites in all major geographical regions of the world using a standard evaluation protocol. Results These standards will assess risk of abnormal size at birth and serve to evaluate potentially effective interventions to promote optimal growth beyond securing survival. Discussion The new normative standards have the potential to impact perinatal and neonatal survival and beyond, particularly in developing countries where fetal growth restriction is most prevalent. They will help us identify intrauterine growth restriction at earlier stages of development, when preventive or corrective strategies might be more effective than at present. Conclusion These growth standards will take us one step closer to effective action in preventing and potentially reversing abnormal intrauterine growth. Achieving 'optimal' fetal growth requires that we act not only during pregnancy but that we optimize the maternal uterine environment from the time before conception, through embryonic development until fetal growth is complete. The remaining challenge is how 'early' will we be able to act, now that we can better monitor fetal growth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyses the geometry of intra-thoracic organs from computed tomography (CT) scans performed on 20 children aged from 4 months to 16 years. The aim is to find the most reliable measurements to characterise the growth of heart and lungs from CT data. Standard measurements available on chest radiographies are compared with original measurements only available on CT scans. These measurements should characterise the growth of organs as well as the changes in their position relative to the thorax. Measurements were considered as functions of age. Quadratic regression models were fitted to the data. Goodness of fit of the models was then evaluated. Positions of organs relative to the thorax have a high variability compared with their changes with age. The length and volume of the heart and lungs as well as the diameter of the thorax fit well to the models of growth. It could be interesting to study these measurements with a larger sample size in order to define growth standards. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Objective: To compare the median weight, height and body mass index of school children with the 2000 CDC and 2007 WHO reference values. Settings: Schoolchildren in Sagamu, Nigeria. Design: Cross-sectional survey. Methods: Between November and December, 2008, 1690 school children aged 6 to 16 years from 8 primary schools were surveyed using multi-stage sampling methods. The weight, height and body mass index (BMI) were recorded for each child. The Z-scores of the median anthropometric parameters for each age and sex were determined with the LMS statistical method using the values of L, M and S provided on the CDC and WHO charts. Results: The weight, height and BMI Z-scores were less than the reference values provided on the CDC and WHO charts but were generally closer to the WHO standards compared to the CDC standards. The median weight, height and BMI for females generally plotted higher on CDC and WHO chart compared to the males. The prevalence of underweight and stunting were relatively lower while the prevalence of overweight and obesity was relatively higher among children aged 6 to 10 years using the WHO references compared to the CDC reference values. Conclusions: The WHO references would under-diagnose under-nutrition and over-diagnose overweight/obesity in the population studied. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Growth reference charts are the basic assessment tool of child health whether at an individual, community, or national level. The comparison of a child''s height or weight with the distribution of heights or weights of a reference sample provides evidence of the normality or otherwise of the process of growth. In the UK, the most widely used growth references are the UK1990 growth references (UK90). In 2006 the World Health Organisation launched the new chart and stated that, “The new growth curves are expected to provide a single international standard that represents the best description of physiological growth for all children from birth to five years of age and to establish the breastfed infant as the normative model for growth and development.” It is important to distinguish between a growth reference (e.g. UK90) and a growth standard (e.g. WHO 2006). Growth reference charts are usually based on cross-sectional data, they are for use with samples and they reflect growth “as is” rather than “as it ought to be”. Growth standards are a different tool – they are based on longitudinal data in which the source sample has been selected according to some pre-defined criteria and reflect growth not “as is” but growth “as it ought to be”. The Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN) recommended in 2007 that a modified WHO chart be adopted in the UK. These UK-WHO growth charts combined the UK90 data with the WHO data; the WHO data were used from birth to 4 years and the UK90 data from 4 years onwards. However, the WHO charts are standards not references and reflect the growth of children growing in unconstrained environments. Because they are longitudinal standards the WHO charts (particularly from birth to 2 years) should be used specifically for individuals rather than samples. They do not purport to represent the growth characteristics of the average child in a population and if used as a growth reference rather than a growth standard they will potentially provide conflicting and erroneous information. Tests of the UK-WHO chart in the UK indicate a good fit for length/height but a relatively poorer fit for weight because of slower weight gain in the WHO sample. Tests of the WHO charts from outside the UK recognise their usefulness for well-fed economically privileged children but recommend local growth charts when available. In addition, the vast majority of UK infants are not exclusively breastfed for anywhere near the recommended duration of 4 months and the duration of breastfeeding is heavily influenced by social and economic circumstances. It is, of course, the infants who live in social and economically deprived conditions, with young, poorly educated mothers who also have the greatest risk of growth faltering and for whom an accurate and appropriate growth assessment tool is of paramount importance. The choice of a growth chart clearly depends on the question being asked. Growth charts are not only tools but they are very specific tools designed to do a particular job. Their appropriate use requires training and education even though their appearance as relatively simple graphs of height or weight against age gives the impression of simplicity and a lack of sophistication. Indeed they are neither of these things. If the question relates to the growth of a child in comparison to breastfed infants living in socio-economic conditions that do not constrain growth then the WHO standard is the appropriate tool. If, on the other hand, the question relates to the growth of a child in comparison to other British children from no specific socio-economic background and with no specific feeding regime, then the UK90 will effectively answer the question. Of course, the WHO standard can be used in both situations but the probable absence of exclusive breastfeeding and perhaps the variation in socio-economic conditions within which the infant lives will necessarily alter the interpretation of the pattern of growth. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: Growth reference charts are important tools for adequate paediatric decisions. Aim: In view of the workload required to construct empirical growth reference charts we debate practicable and less demanding alternatives and took the recent national 2000–2002 Lithuanian growth charts as an example. Two options appeared reasonable: (1) applying international WHO child growth standards and WHO growth reference data for 5–19 years that are recommended for global use; or (2) replacing the costly empirical method of deriving national growth references by more convenient low-cost statistics, e.g. the method of generating synthetic references for the Lithuanian population. Methods: We analysed the degree of agreement between the 2000–2002 Lithuanian growth charts, and the international WHO child growth standards and WHO growth reference data for 5–19 years and synthetic references for the Lithuanian population using the Bland–Altman method. Results: Synthetically generated references for the Lithuanian population slightly surpassed the national Lithuanian reference for body height (males +0.3 (SD 0.9) cm; females +0.2 (SD 0.6) cm) particularly at young age, which may be regarded clinically irrelevant. WHO international child growth standards and the WHO growth reference data for 5–19 years, however, failed to match the Lithuanian references as they underestimated mean height in boys by –2.8 (SD 1.4) cm and in girls by –2.9 (SD 1.1) cm, with extremely discrepant estimates of more than –6 cm occurring in several adolescent cohorts. Conclusions: The analysis revitalizes the debate on clinically relevant and at the same time practicable but less demanding alternatives for constructing growth reference charts, and for economic reasons, strongly suggests replacing the traditional empirical methods by synthetic growth references. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In 2006, the World Health Organization published universal growth standards for all children from birth to 5 years of age, based on a sample of breastfed children. Aims: The present study documented breastfeeding prevalence in the Flemish Growth Survey 2004, and compared growth of exclusively breastfed children in Flanders with local reference charts and WHO growth standards. Subjects and methods: A subset of 3287 children 0–3 years of age from the Flemish reference population was studied. Prevalence and duration of breastfeeding were estimated with the status quo method. SD scores (SDS) of length/height, weight, BMI, and head circumference were plotted by age. Results: Breastfeeding is initiated for 68.2% of children, and approximately 25% were exclusively breastfed until at least 6 months of age. Breastfed children grow according to a typical pattern that deviates from the local reference curve. The average length of breastfed children is reasonably close to the WHO growth standard, but this does not hold for weight, BMI, or head circumference. In Flanders, breastfed children are more comparable to the local reference than to the WHO growth standards. Conclusions: Growth of breastfed children is similar to the WHO standards for length, but not for other traits. In Flanders, the use of the recent local growth reference is advised for both breastfed and formula-fed children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To establish new reference values for measurements of waist circumference and waist-to-height ratio in preschool children. Methods: A population-based, cross-sectional study of 4502 children aged 0–5 years derived from child health care in a Swedish county. Measurements of weight, height and waist circumference were recorded using a standardized procedure. Results: New reference values for waist circumference and waist-to-height ratio for preschool children are presented. Reference charts were constructed and are presented. Waist circumference increased with age (r = 0.80, p < 0.001). After adjustment to the individual height, expressed as waist-to-height ratio, there was an inverse correlation to age during the first 5 years of age (r = −0.87, p < 0.001). Conclusion: The new reference values for waist circumference and waist-to-height ratio for Swedish preschool children enable future identification of new risk populations for childhood obesity. For clinicians, new reference charts for these two variables are provided for practical use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) recently developed growth standards to overcome the limitations of previous references. Aim: The aim of this study was to compare the growth patterns of a cohort of children using the National Centre for Health Statistics (NCHS), the Centre for Disease Control (CDC), and WHO 2006 references/standards, and to evaluate the implications of adopting WHO standards. Subjects and methods: Using growth data (0-5 years) from the 1990 South African Birth to Twenty cohort in Johannesburg-Soweto, Z-scores were derived for weight-for-age, length/height-for age, and weight-for-length/height from the NCHS and CDC references, and WHO 2006 standards. Results: The pattern of mean Z-score change observed when applying the NCHS and CDC references was similar to one another, but different to that obtained when using the WHO 2006 standard. WHO 2006 identified children as being generally more stunted and more overweight. Conclusion: Discourse on the implementation of WHO 2006 and the impact on the primary health care system and public health monitoring in South Africa is needed, and sufficient planning is critical around not only the implementation of WHO 2006 but also maintaining comparability with historical malnutrition data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author comments on the issues surrounding the international Child Growth Standards by the World Health Organizations (WHO). According to the author, a growth standard is a good concept although the standards released by the WHO represent only healthy children. The author asserts that there is no uniformity in weight growth included in the WHO standards. The author claims that Western countries should choose between the WHO standards or their own national standards.

Standard methods for comparing population characteristics within and among fish populations greatly enhance communications among fisheries scientists, improve the efficiency of data analysis, and provide insight that helps guide management actions. Although standard methods are available for comparing some fish population characteristics (e.g. length structure, body condition), similar methods are lacking for comparing growth. The purpose of this study was to provide standards (i.e. percentiles and a standard growth model) for nine ecologically and recreationally important fish species. Percentile distributions of mean back-calculated length at age were estimated using data obtained from the published literature and from data solicited from state and federal agencies throughout North America. Percentiles of growth were estimated for bluegill, Lepomis macrochirus Rafinesque, common carp, Cyprinus carpio Linnaeus, flathead catfish, Pylodictis olivaris (Rafinesque), largemouth bass, Micropterus salmoides (Lacepède), sauger, Sander canadensis (Griffith & Smith), smallmouth bass, Micropterus dolomieu Lacepède, white bass, Morone chrysops (Rafinesque) and yellow perch, Perca flavescens (Mitchill). Standard growth models (i.e. von Bertalanffy models) were developed for these species and for channel catfish, Ictalurus punctatus (Rafinesque). These results provide tools that will help scientists compare growth of fishes across North America. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To compare estimates of undernutrition based on the World Health Organization (WHO) Child Growth Standards (‘WHO standards’) and the National Center for Health Statistics NCHS/WHO international growth reference (‘NCHS reference’), and discuss implications for child health programs and reporting of prevalence of underweight in demographic surveys. A cross-sectional study was carried out in 20 Anganwadi centers under Primary Health Centre, Anji. Total of 1491 under-six year children attending the Anganwadi centers were studied for nutritional status. Nutritional status was analyzed by NCHS standards by using EPI_INFO 6.04 software package and also by newly introduced WHO Child Growth Standards by Anthro 2005 software package. Chi-square test was used to compare the results. According to WHO standards, the prevalence of underweight and severe underweight for children 0–6 year was 47.4% and 16.9% respectively. By NCHS reference, the overall prevalence of underweight and severe underweight for children 0–6 years was 53% and 15% respectively. The prevalence of underweight as assessed by WHO standards was significantly lower when compared with the assessment based on NCHS reference (p<0.01). But, WHO standards gave higher prevalence of severe underweight than NCHS reference though the difference was not statistically significant (p>0.05). In the light of newly developed WHO Child growth standards, all the nutrition-related indicators in demographic surveys like NFHS should now be derived using the WHO standards. There is need to reanalyze NFHS-I and NFHS-II data using WHO standards and findings should be made available so that it becomes comparable and trends over the years can be studied. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]