ArticleBMJ open2020
Comparison of growth models to describe growth from birth to 6 years in a Beninese cohort of children with repeated measurements.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. 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.
- Development of Palatal Growth Charts for Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate Before Primary Single-Stage Repair.The Cleft palate-craniofacial journal : official publication of the American Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Association · 2026Article
- Anthropometric indices growth references (length, Weight and Head Circumferences) of children aged 0-24 months in North-East of Iran by GAMLSS.BMC pediatrics · 2024Article
- Natural disease course modeling of achondroplasia to evaluate the efficacy of recifercept in the absence of a placebo control arm in phase II study.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2024Article
- Fetal and Infancy Exposure to Phenols, Parabens, and Phthalates and Anthropometric Measurements up to 36 Months, in the Longitudinal SEPAGES Cohort.Environmental health perspectives · 2024Article
- Article
- Nonlinear Physical Growth of Children from Infancy to Middle Adolescence in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.Journal of research in health sciences · 2021Article
- Novel type of references for weight aligned for onset of puberty - using the QEPS growth model.BMC pediatrics · 2021Article
- Follow-Up of Elevated Blood Lead Levels and Sources in a Cohort of Children in Benin.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Growth Prediction of Under-5 Children Using Statistical Models for Eastern Region of India.Indian journal of community medicine : official publication of Indian Association of Preventive & Social MedicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo select a growth model that best describes individual growth trajectories of children and to present some growth characteristics of this population. SETTINGS: Participants were selected from a prospective cohort conducted in three health centres (Allada, Sekou and Attogon) in a semirural region of Benin, sub-Saharan Africa.
participantsChildren aged 0 to 6 years were recruited in a cohort study with at least two valid height and weight measurements included (n=961). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: This study compared the goodness-of-fit of three structural growth models (Jenss-Bayley, Reed and a newly adapted version of the Gompertz growth model) on longitudinal weight and height growth data of boys and girls. The goodness-of-fit of the models was assessed using residual distribution over age and compared with the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) and Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC). The best-fitting model allowed estimating mean weight and height growth trajectories, individual growth and growth velocities. Underweight, stunting and wasting were also estimated at age 6 years.
resultsThe three models were able to fit well both weight and height data. The Jenss-Bayley model presented the best fit for weight and height, both in boys and girls. Mean height growth trajectories were identical in shape and direction for boys and girls while the mean weight growth curve of girls fell slightly below the curve of boys after neonatal life. Finally, 35%, 27.7% and 8% of boys; and 34%, 38.4% and 4% of girls were estimated to be underweight, wasted and stunted at age 6 years, respectively.
conclusionThe growth parameters of the best-fitting Jenss-Bayley model can be used to describe growth trajectories and study their determinants.
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.