Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31340931›Full record

SynthesisBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2019

Development and validation of a prediction model for fat mass in children and adolescents: meta-analysis using individual participant data.

Mohammed T Hudda, Mary S Fewtrell, Dalia Haroun, Sooky Lum, Jane E Williams, Jonathan C K Wells, Richard D Riley, Christopher G Owen, Derek G Cook, Alicja R Rudnicka and 2 more

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

12 authors.

Mohammed T HuddaPopulation Health Research Institute, St George's, University of London, London SW17 0RE, UK.
Mary S FewtrellPopulation, Policy and Practice Programme, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, UK.
Dalia HarounCollege of Natural and Health Sciences, Department of Public Health and Nutrition, Zayed University, Dubai, UAE.
Sooky LumRespiratory, Critical Care and Anaesthesia section of III Programme, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, UK.
Jane E WilliamsPopulation, Policy and Practice Programme, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, UK.
Jonathan C K WellsPopulation, Policy and Practice Programme, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, UK.
Richard D RileyCentre for Prognosis Research, Research Institute for Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Staffordshire, UK.
Christopher G OwenPopulation Health Research Institute, St George's, University of London, London SW17 0RE, UK.
Derek G CookPopulation Health Research Institute, St George's, University of London, London SW17 0RE, UK.
Alicja R RudnickaPopulation Health Research Institute, St George's, University of London, London SW17 0RE, UK.
Peter H WhincupPopulation Health Research Institute, St George's, University of London, London SW17 0RE, UK.
Claire M NightingalePopulation Health Research Institute, St George's, University of London, London SW17 0RE, UK cnightin@sgul.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-4803-7617

Funding

British Heart FoundationMedical Research Council G9815508Medical Research Council MC_PC_15018Medical Research Council MC_PC_19009Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo develop and validate a prediction model for fat mass in children aged 4-15 years using routinely available risk factors of height, weight, and demographic information without the need for more complex forms of assessment.

designIndividual participant data meta-analysis.

settingFour population based cross sectional studies and a fifth study for external validation, United Kingdom.

participantsA pooled derivation dataset (four studies) of 2375 children and an external validation dataset of 176 children with complete data on anthropometric measurements and deuterium dilution assessments of fat mass.

main outcome measureMultivariable linear regression analysis, using backwards selection for inclusion of predictor variables and allowing non-linear relations, was used to develop a prediction model for fat-free mass (and subsequently fat mass by subtracting resulting estimates from weight) based on the four studies. Internal validation and then internal-external cross validation were used to examine overfitting and generalisability of the model's predictive performance within the four development studies; external validation followed using the fifth dataset.

resultsModel derivation was based on a multi-ethnic population of 2375 children (47.8% boys, n=1136) aged 4-15 years. The final model containing predictor variables of height, weight, age, sex, and ethnicity had extremely high predictive ability (optimism adjusted R

conclusionThe developed model accurately predicted levels of fat mass in children aged 4-15 years. The prediction model is based on simple anthropometric measures without the need for more complex forms of assessment and could improve the accuracy of assessments for body fatness in children (compared with those provided by body mass index) for effective surveillance, prevention, and management of clinical and public health obesity.

Indexed as

ObesityAdipose TissueAdolescentAnthropometryChildChild, PreschoolHumansModels, TheoreticalPredictive Value of Tests

Identifiers

PMID31340931
PMCPMC6650932

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.