Observational studyBMC family practice2020
Characteristics associated with pediatric growth measurement collection in electronic medical records: a retrospective observational study.
Observational study in BMC family practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- An audit of completeness of Road to Health Booklet at a community health centre in South Africa.African journal of primary health care & family medicine · 2024Article
- Primary healthcare professionals' role in monitoring infant growth: A scoping review.Journal of child health care : for professionals working with children in the hospital and community · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundComplete growth measurements are an essential part of pediatric care providing a proxy for a child's overall health. This study describes the frequency of well-child visits, documented growth measurements, and clinic and provider factors associated with measurement.
methodsRetrospective cross-sectional study utilizing electronic medical records (EMRs) from primary care clinics between 2015 and 2017 in Manitoba, Canada. This study assessed the presence of recorded height, weight and head circumference among children (0-24 months) who visited one of 212 providers participating in the Manitoba Primary Care Research Network. Descriptive and multivariable logistic regression analyses assessed clinic, provider, and patient factors associated with children having complete growth measurements.
resultsOur sample included 4369 children. The most frequent growth measure recorded was weight (79.2% n = 3460) followed by height (70.8% n = 3093) and head circumference (51.4% n = 2246). 67.5% of children (n = 2947) had at least one complete growth measurement recorded (i.e. weight, height and head circumference) and 13.7% (n = 599) had complete growth measurements at all well-child intervals attended. Pediatricians had 2.7 higher odds of documenting complete growth measures within well-child intervals compared to family physicians (95% CI 1.8-3.8). Additionally, urban located clinics (OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.2-2.5), Canadian trained providers (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.4-3.7), small practice size (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.2-2.2) and salaried providers (OR 3.4, 95% CI 2.2-5.2) had higher odds of documented growth measures.
conclusionsGrowth measurements are recorded in EMRs but documentation is variable based on clinic and provider factors. Pediatric growth measures at primary care appointments can improve primary prevention and surveillance of child health outcomes.
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.