Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25162658›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Relationships between neonatal weight, limb lengths, skinfold thicknesses, body breadths and circumferences in an Australian cohort.

Emma Pomeroy, Jay T Stock, Tim J Cole, Michael O'Callaghan, Jonathan C K Wells

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Leg length and type 2 diabetes: what's the link?Current opinion in clinical nutrition and metabolic care · 2015
    Review
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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Emma PomeroyNewnham College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; Division of Biological Anthropology, Department of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Jay T StockDivision of Biological Anthropology, Department of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Tim J ColePopulation Policy and Practice, UCL Institute of Child Health, London, United Kingdom.
Michael O'CallaghanSchool of Medicine, Mater Clinical School, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Jonathan C K WellsDivision of Biological Anthropology, Department of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom; Childhood Nutrition Research Centre, UCL Institute of Child Health, London, United Kingdom.
University College London · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GBUniversity of Queensland · AU

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/J004839/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLow birth weight has been consistently associated with adult chronic disease risk. The thrifty phenotype hypothesis assumes that reduced fetal growth impacts some organs more than others. However, it remains unclear how birth weight relates to different body components, such as circumferences, adiposity, body segment lengths and limb proportions. We hypothesized that these components vary in their relationship to birth weight.

methodsWe analysed the relationship between birth weight and detailed anthropometry in 1270 singleton live-born neonates (668 male) from the Mater-University of Queensland Study of Pregnancy (Brisbane, Australia). We tested adjusted anthropometry for correlations with birth weight. We then performed stepwise multiple regression on birth weight of: body lengths, breadths and circumferences; relative limb to neck-rump proportions; or skinfold thicknesses. All analyses were adjusted for sex and gestational age, and used logged data.

resultsCircumferences, especially chest, were most strongly related to birth weight, while segment lengths (neck-rump, thigh, upper arm, and especially lower arm and lower leg) were relatively weakly related to birth weight, and limb lengths relative to neck-rump length showed no relationship. Skinfolds accounted for 36% of birth weight variance, but adjusting for size (neck-rump, thigh and upper arm lengths, and head circumference), this decreased to 10%. There was no evidence that heavier babies had proportionally thicker skinfolds.

conclusionsNeonatal body measurements vary in their association with birth weight: head and chest circumferences showed the strongest associations while limb segment lengths did not relate strongly to birth weight. After adjusting for body size, subcutaneous fatness accounted for a smaller proportion of birth weight variance than previously reported. While heavier babies had absolutely thicker skinfolds, this was proportional to their size. Relative limb to trunk length was unrelated to birth weight, suggesting that limb proportions at birth do not index factors relevant to prenatal life.

Indexed as

AnthropometryBirth WeightBody HeightSkinfold ThicknessAdultAustraliaFemaleGestational AgeHumansInfant, NewbornMalePregnancyRegression AnalysisWaist Circumference

Identifiers

PMID25162658
PMCPMC4146506
OpenAlexW1969302499

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.