ArticleMaternal & child nutrition2012
Designing new UK-WHO growth charts: implications for health staff use and understanding of charts and growth monitoring.
Article in Maternal & child nutrition, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Mobile App, KhunLook, to Support Thai Parents and Caregivers With Child Health Supervision: Development, Validation, and Acceptability Study.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2020Trial
- Evaluation of the implementation of personalised outcomes forecasts to optimise supervised exercise therapy in patients with intermittent claudication: a multimethods process evaluation.BMJ open quality · 2025Article
- Primary healthcare professionals' role in monitoring infant growth: A scoping review.Journal of child health care : for professionals working with children in the hospital and community · 2024Article
- Identifying underweight in infants and children using growth charts, lookup tables and a novel "MAMI" slide chart: A cross-over diagnostic and acceptability study.PLOS global public health · 2023Article
- Person-Centered Care and Physical Therapy: A "People-Like-Me" Approach.Physical therapy · 2020Article
- Prevalence of growth monitoring practice and its associated factors at public health facilities of North Gondar zone, northwest Ethiopia: an institution-based mixed study.BMC pediatrics · 2019Article
- Calibration of confidence and assessed clinical skills competence in undergraduate paediatric OSCE scenarios: a mixed methods study.BMC medical education · 2018Article
- Practices and challenges of growth monitoring and promotion in ethiopia: a qualitative study.Journal of health, population, and nutrition · 2014Article
- Reappraisal of Regional Growth Charts in the Era of WHO Growth Standards.Pediatric gastroenterology, hepatology & nutrition · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
New pre-school UK charts have been produced incorporating the new World Health Organization growth standards based on healthy breastfed infants. This paper describes the process by which the charts and evidence-based instructions were designed and evaluated, and what it revealed about professional understanding of charts and growth monitoring. A multidisciplinary expert group drew on existing literature, new data analyses and parent focus groups as well as two series of chart-plotting workshops for health staff. The first series explored possible design features and general chart understanding. The second evaluated an advanced prototype with instructions, using plotting and interpretation of three separate scenarios on the old charts, compared with the new charts. The first plotting workshops (46 participants) allowed decisions to be made about the exact chart format, but it also revealed widespread confusion about use of adjustment for gestation and the plotting of birthweight. In the second series (78 participants), high levels of plotting inaccuracy were identified on both chart formats, with 64% of respondents making at least one major mistake. Significant neonatal weight loss was poorly recognized. While most participants recognized abnormal and normal growth patterns, 13-20% did not. Many respondents had never received any formal training in chart use. Growth charts are complex clinical tools that are, at present, poorly understood and inconsistently used. The importance of clear guidelines and formal training has now been recognized and translated into supporting educational materials (free to download at http://www.growthcharts.rcpch.ac.uk).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.