ArticlePloS one2017
Priority target conditions for algorithms for monitoring children's growth: Interdisciplinary consensus.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development, internal and external evaluation of an artificial intelligence algorithm for child growth monitoring in primary care.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Advancing Pediatric Growth Assessment with Machine Learning: Overcoming Challenges in Early Diagnosis and Monitoring.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Presentation and diagnosis of childhood-onset combined pituitary hormone deficiency: A single center experience from over 30 years.EClinicalMedicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGrowth monitoring of apparently healthy children aims at early detection of serious conditions through the use of both clinical expertise and algorithms that define abnormal growth. Optimization of growth monitoring requires standardization of the definition of abnormal growth, and the selection of the priority target conditions is a prerequisite of such standardization.
objectiveTo obtain a consensus about the priority target conditions for algorithms monitoring children's growth.
methodsWe applied a formal consensus method with a modified version of the RAND/UCLA method, based on three phases (preparatory, literature review, and rating), with the participation of expert advisory groups from the relevant professional medical societies (ranging from primary care providers to hospital subspecialists) as well as parent associations. We asked experts in the pilot (n = 11), reading (n = 8) and rating (n = 60) groups to complete the list of diagnostic classification of the European Society for Paediatric Endocrinology and then to select the conditions meeting the four predefined criteria of an ideal type of priority target condition.
resultsStrong agreement was obtained for the 8 conditions selected by the experts among the 133 possible: celiac disease, Crohn disease, craniopharyngioma, juvenile nephronophthisis, Turner syndrome, growth hormone deficiency with pituitary stalk interruption syndrome, infantile cystinosis, and hypothalamic-optochiasmatic astrocytoma (in decreasing order of agreement).
conclusionThis national consensus can be used to evaluate the algorithms currently suggested for growth monitoring. The method used for this national consensus could be re-used to obtain an international consensus.
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.