SynthesisEndocrine2019
Efficacy and safety of long-acting growth hormone in children with short stature: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Endocrine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long-acting growth hormone in the treatment of growth hormone deficiency in children: a systematic literature review and network meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2024Pooled it
- Effect of Weekly Long-Acting Growth Hormone Replacement Therapy Compared to Daily Growth Hormone on Children With Short Stature: A Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2021Pooled it
- Impact of growth hormone treatment on childhood growth patterns in Kermanshah: A retrospective cohort study.Journal of education and health promotion · 2026Article
- Delphi-based Spanish consensus on the use of long-acting growth hormone in pediatric growth hormone deficiency: recommendations from the ConverGHe Working Group.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
- Current understanding and perspectives on growth and long-acting GH therapy in Japan.Clinical pediatric endocrinology : case reports and clinical investigations : official journal of the Japanese Society for Pediatric Endocrinology · 2025Review
- Effects of different doses of long-acting growth hormone in treating children with growth hormone deficiency.World journal of clinical cases · 2023Article
- Effectiveness and Safety of Combination Therapy with Herbal Medicine and Growth Hormone Compared to Growth Hormone Monotherapy for Short Stature Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2022Review
- Advances in differential diagnosis and management of growth hormone deficiency in children.Nature reviews. Endocrinology · 2021Review
- Human Growth and Growth Hormone: From Antiquity to the Recominant Age to the Future.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2021Review
- Diagnosis and Treatment of Growth Hormone Deficiency: A Position Statement from Korean Endocrine Society and Korean Society of Pediatric Endocrinology.Endocrinology and metabolism (Seoul, Korea) · 2020Article
- Long-Acting Growth Hormone Preparations - Current Status and Future Considerations.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2020Review
- Management of Hypopituitarism.Journal of clinical medicine · 2019Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeLong-acting growth hormone (GH) has been developed to address the noncompliance and decreased efficacy associated with daily GH injections. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of long-acting GH replacement therapy in children with short stature.
methodsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the efficacy and safety of long-acting GH therapy in children with short stature in comparison with daily GH injections were searched in Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. A random-effect model was used to pool data using mean difference and odds ratios (OR). (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018111105).
resultsSeven relevant studies were finally included. Meta-analysis found there was no significant difference between high-dose long-acting GH and daily GH in terms of height velocity (HV) (mean difference (MD) = -0.10, 95% CI, -0.79 to 0.60, P = 0.79). Moreover, no significant difference was observed in height standard deviation scores (Ht SDS) between high-dose long-acting GH and daily GH (MD = -0.07, 95% CI, -0.18 to 0.03, P = 0.17). Treatment with high-dose long-acting GH significantly increased IGF-1 SDS when compared with daily GH (MD = 0.31, 95% CI, 0.06-0.56, P = 0.02). In safety assessment, no significant difference was observed in the incidence of adverse events between high-dose long-acting GH and daily GH (OR 1.42, 95% CI, 0.65-3.11, P = 0.38).
conclusionsThere is no evidence to support differences in the effects of long-acting GH compared with those of daily GH. More RCTs that focus on the safety of high-dose long-acting GH treatment, especially the detection of adverse events caused by elevated levels of serum IGF-1, are needed in the future.
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.