Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35570836›Full record

ArticlePaediatric and perinatal epidemiology2022

Implications for quantifying early life growth trajectories of term-born infants using INTERGROWTH-21st newborn size standards at birth in conjunction with World Health Organization child growth standards in the postnatal period.

Nandita Perumal, Eric O Ohuma, Andrew M Prentice, Prakesh S Shah, Abdullah Al Mahmud, Sophie E Moore, Daniel E Roth

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 39% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Review
  3. 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

7 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.

Nandita PerumalDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3624-4405
Eric O OhumaCentre for Global Child Health, Peter Gilgan Centre for Research and Learning, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Andrew M PrenticeMRC Unit The Gambia at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Fajara, The Gambia.
Prakesh S ShahDepartment of Pediatrics, Mount Sinai Hospital & the University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Abdullah Al MahmudInternational Centre for Diarrheal Disease Research, Bangladesh (icddr,b), Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Sophie E MooreMRC Unit The Gambia at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Fajara, The Gambia.
Daniel E RothCentre for Global Child Health, Peter Gilgan Centre for Research and Learning, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-7742-0925
Hospital for Sick Children · CAInternational Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research · BDKing's College London · GBMount Sinai Hospital · CAMRC Unit the Gambia · GMUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

Medical Research Council MC-A760-5QX00Medical Research Council MC_PC_MR/R020183/1Medical Research Council MC_UU_00026/3Medical Research Council MR/P012019/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe INTERGROWTH-21st sex and gestational age (GA) specific newborn size standards (IG-NS) are intended to complement the World Health Organization Child Growth Standards (WHO-GS), which are not GA-specific. We examined the implications of using IG-NS at birth and WHO-GS at postnatal ages in longitudinal epidemiologic studies.

objectivesThe aim of this study was to quantify the extent to which standardised measures of newborn size and growth are affected when using WHO-GS versus IG-NS at birth among term-born infants.

methodsData from two prenatal trials in Bangladesh (n = 755) and The Gambia (n = 522) were used to estimate and compare size at birth and growth from birth to 3 months when using WHO-GS only ('WHO-GS') versus IG-NS at birth and WHO-GS postnatally ('IG-NS'). Mean length-for-age (LAZ), weight-for-age (WAZ) and head circumference-for-age (HCAZ), and the prevalence of undernutrition (stunting: LAZ < -2SD; underweight: WAZ < -2SD; and microcephaly: HCAZ < -2SD) were estimated overall and by GA strata [early-term (37

resultsAt birth, mean LAZ, WAZ and HCAZ, and the prevalence of undernutrition were most similar among newborns between 39 and 40 weeks of GA when using WHO-GS versus IG-NS. However, anthropometric indices were systematically lower among early-term infants and higher among late-term infants when using WHO-GS versus IG-NS. Early-term and late-term infants demonstrated relatively faster and slower growth, respectively, when using WHO-GS versus IG-NS, with the direction and magnitude of differences varying between anthropometric indices. Individual-level differences in attained size and growth, when using WHO-GS versus IG-NS, were greater than 0.2 SD in magnitude for >60% of infants across all anthropometric indices.

conclusionsUsing IG-NS at birth with WHO-GS postnatally is acceptable for full-term infants but may give a misleading interpretation of growth trajectories among early- and late-term infants.

Indexed as

MalnutritionParturitionAnthropometryBirth WeightChildFemaleGestational AgeHumansInfantInfant, NewbornPregnancyWorld Health OrganizationanthropometrygrowthINTERGROWTH-21st newborn size standardsnewbornterm-bornWorld Health Organization child growth standards

Identifiers

PMID35570836
PMCPMC9790258
OpenAlexW4280601806

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.