Evidence map›Paper›PMID 14717473›Full record

ReviewJournal of the National Medical Association2003

Birthweight, rapid growth, cancer, and longevity: a review.

Thomas T Samaras, Harold Elrick, Lowell H Storms

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of the National Medical Association, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Metabolic programming in the pathogenesis of insulin resistance.Reviews in endocrine & metabolic disorders · 2007
    Review
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Thomas T SamarasReventropy Associates, San Diego, CA, USA. samarastt@aol.com
Harold Elrick
Lowell H Storms

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The fetal growth restriction hypothesis states that retarded growth in utero promotes health problems later in life. While most of the studies on intrauterine growth retardation (as measured by birthweight) confirm this hypothesis, many researchers have found flaws in these studies. In addition, many studies have found either no correlation or a positive relation between birthweight (BW) and adult blood pressure or mortality. Furthermore, high BW leads to greater adult obesity and chronic disease, and increasing macrosomia in newborns raises the risk for birth-related problems. Increased cancer risk is also tied to higher BW, and catch-up or accelerated growth generally has negative health effects. Adult height has been found to correlate with greater BW and birthlength (BL), and several studies have found an inverse relation between height and longevity. Paradoxical findings, such as lower BW and low levels of cardiovascular disease in the developing world, are presented. Within 25 years, genetic engineering will allow in utero alterations to the fetus, resulting in higher BW and taller adults. The authors suggest that increased BW leading to larger adult body size has dangerous implications in terms of human health and survival.

Indexed as

Birth WeightBody HeightBody WeightHealth StatusLongevityAdolescentAdultAgedBody ConstitutionChildFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID14717473
PMCPMC2594855

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.