Observational studyInternational journal of epidemiology2016
Methodological challenges in studying the causal determinants of child growth.
Observational study in International journal of epidemiology, 2016. 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.
- Statistical methods for analyzing change over time of continuous outcomes in observational health studies: a scoping review of suggested approaches.Systematic reviews · 2026Article
- Stunting Reversal versus Regression to the Mean in Epidemiological Studies of Child Linear Growth in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2026Review
- Do Early Infant Feeding Practices and Modifiable Household Behaviors Contribute to Age-Specific Interindividual Variations in Infant Linear Growth? Evidence from a Birth Cohort in Dhaka, Bangladesh.Current developments in nutrition · 2021Article
- Early childhood growth trajectory and later cognitive ability: evidence from a large prospective birth cohort of healthy term-born children.International journal of epidemiology · 2021Article
- Association of Weight for Length vs Body Mass Index During the First 2 Years of Life With Cardiometabolic Risk in Early Adolescence.JAMA network open · 2018Article
- Metrics of early childhood growth in recent epidemiological research: A scoping review.PloS one · 2018Article
- Maternal gestational weight gain and DNA methylation in young women: application of life course mediation methods.Epigenomics · 2017Article
- Current child, but not maternal, snoring is bi-directionally related to adiposity and cardiometabolic risk markers: A cross-sectional and a prospective cohort analysis.Metabolism: clinical and experimental · 2017Article
- Offspring risk of obesity in childhood, adolescence and adulthood in relation to gestational diabetes mellitus: a sex-specific association.International journal of epidemiology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Previous studies of early life influences on later growth in childhood have varied in their analytical approaches, particularly with respect to 'adjustment' for differences in size at the beginning of the growth period examined. Methods: We compared three commonly used statistical models to assess the effect of maternal body mass index (BMI) on growth between 6.5 and 11.5 years in a large cohort of Belarusian children, as follows: (Model 1) analysis of the difference in anthropometric measurements between the two ages; (Model 2) analysis of the measurement at 11.5 years after adjustment for the same measurement at 6.5 years; and (Model 3) analysis of the difference in measurements after adjustment for the measurement at 6.5 years (mathematically identical to Model 2). Results: Among PROBIT children of obese mothers (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m 2 ) vs those of mothers with normal BMI (18.5 to < 25 kg/m 2 ), Model 1 yielded larger increases in most weight and adiposity outcomes than did Model 2. We show that these larger effects arise because Model 2 parameterizes the effect of maternal BMI twice in same model: once for its effect on size at 6.5 years, and a second time for its effect on growth over the 5-year period between 6.5 and 11.5 years. Similar results were obtained in analogous analyses from cohorts in Boston, MA, and Singapore. Conclusion: Analysing the effect of exposure on change in outcome between two ages (Model 1) is clearly preferable to 'adjustment' for the outcome at the earlier age whenever the exposure under study affects the outcome at the earlier age.
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.