ArticleIndian journal of endocrinology and metabolism
Field Testing of Synthetic Growth Charts in 1-60-Month-Old Indian Children.
Article in Indian journal of endocrinology and metabolism. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Change in Grading of Stunting in Children aged 0-5 years in a Tertiary Hospital in Western India by Using WHO vs. Indian References.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2026Article
- Local anthropometric parameters for assessing double burden of malnutrition in South Asian and Southeast Asian countries: a review and retrospective analysis.The Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia · 2024Review
- Comparison of Nutritional Status of Healthy Under-Five Indian Children Using Composite Index of Anthropometric Failure on WHO 2006 versus 2019 Indian Synthetic Growth Charts.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2024Observational
- Comparison of WHO 2006 Growth Standards and Synthetic Indian References in Assessing Growth in Normal Children and Children with Growth-Related Disorders.Indian journal of endocrinology and metabolismArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Malnutrition among under-five children (U5C) in India is a major public health problem due to double burden caused by nutritional transition. WHO cut-offs are adopted as global growth standards which define how children should grow in condition of optimal nutrition and health. Growth references which are representative of population-specific existing growth patterns need to be updated regularly which is cumbersome; hence, the author's group published 'synthetic growth references' for Indian children of age 0-18 years. Objectives: The objective of this study is to field test the new synthetic growth references in U5C for height-for-age, weight-for-age and body mass index (BMI)-for-age against WHO charts in urban and rural Indian children to estimate prevalence of various indices of malnutrition. Methods: A cross-sectional anthropometric assessment of apparently healthy rural and urban Indian U5C attending vaccination centre was performed using standard protocols. They were converted to Results: WHO charts significantly overestimated stunting and malnutrition as compared to synthetic references with difference in sensitivity of 7.2% and 8.5%, respectively, and converse for over-nutrition by 2.1%. The most commonly affected parameter of malnutrition was underweight. Stunting was significantly higher in rural population using both cut-offs ( Conclusion: The synthetic references limit the spread of weight and BMI and do not overestimate stunting and wasting. They may be more useful for identification of malnutrition and may thus be recommended for routine screening in Indian U5C.
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.