Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26242408›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for equity in health2015

Disadvantaged children at greater relative risk of thinness (as well as obesity): a secondary data analysis of the England National Child Measurement Programme and the UK Millennium Cohort Study.

Anna Pearce, Emeline Rougeaux, Catherine Law

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for equity in health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Anna PearcePopulation Policy and Practice, UCL Institute of Child Health, 30 Guilford Street, London, WC1N 1EH, UK. anna.pearce@ucl.ac.uk.
Emeline RougeauxPopulation Policy and Practice, UCL Institute of Child Health, 30 Guilford Street, London, WC1N 1EH, UK. e.rougeaux@ucl.ac.uk.
Catherine LawPopulation Policy and Practice, UCL Institute of Child Health, 30 Guilford Street, London, WC1N 1EH, UK. catherine.law@ucl.ac.uk.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/J012351/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionYoung children living in more disadvantaged socio-economic circumstances (SECs) are at an increased risk of overweight and obesity. However, there is scant research examining the prevalence and social distribution of thinness in early childhood, despite potential negative consequences for health and development across the life-course.

methodsWe examined the social gradient in thinness (and overweight and obesity for comparison) for 2,620,422 four-to-five year olds attending state maintained primary schools from 2007/8 to 2011/12, in the England National Child Measurement Programme (NCMP), and 16,715 children from the UK Millennium Cohort Study (MCS), born in 2000-2002, and measured at ages of three, five and seven. Children were classified as being thin, healthy weight (and, for completeness, overweight or obese) using international age and sex adjusted cut-offs for body mass index (BMI). Prevalences (and 95% confidence intervals (CIs)) were estimated, overall, and according to SECs: area deprivation (NCMP, MCS); household income, and maternal social class and education (MCS only). Relative Risk Ratios (RRRs) and CIs for thinness, overweight and obesity were estimated in multinomial models by SECs (baseline healthy weight). In the MCS, standard errors were estimated using clustered sandwich estimators to account for repeated measures, and, for thinness, RRRs by SECs were also estimated adjusting for a range of early life characteristics.

resultsIn 2007/8 to 2011/12, 5.20% of four-to-five year old girls (n = 66,584) and 5.88% of boys (78,934) in the NCMP were thin. In the MCS, the prevalence of thinness was 4.59% (693) at three, 4.21% (702) at five, and 5.84% (804) at seven years. In both studies, and for all measures of SECs, children from the most disadvantaged groups were more likely to be thin than those from the most advantaged groups. For example, MCS children whose mothers had no educational qualifications were fifty percent more likely to be thin (RRR 1.5 (CI: 1.24, 1.8)) than those whose mothers had a degree. These patterns were attenuated but remained after adjusting for early life characteristics.

conclusionsChildren from more disadvantaged backgrounds are at elevated relative risk of thinness as well as obesity. Researchers and policymakers should consider environmental influences on thinness in addition to overweight and obesity.

Indexed as

Social ChangeBody Mass IndexChild, PreschoolData Interpretation, StatisticalFemaleHealthcare DisparitiesHumansMaleObesityThinnessUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID26242408
PMCPMC4524014

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.