ArticleAfrican journal of primary health care & family medicine2022
Development of a Zimbabwean child growth curve and its comparison with the World Health Organization child growth standards.
Article in African journal of primary health care & family medicine, 2022. 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.
- The effect of early childhood stature on later cognitive functions in Indonesian adolescents: comparation using the National growth reference and the WHO growth standard.BMC pediatrics · 2025Article
- Growth charts for children aged 6-17 years in Shanxi, China: comparison with other cities of China and WHO.BMC pediatrics · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is limited research that describes the growth trajectories of African children. The development of World Health Organization (WHO) growth standards considered a sample of children who lived in environments optimum for human growth.
aimThis study aimed to develop weight-for-age and height-for-age growth curves from the Zimbabwean 2018 National Nutrition Survey and compare them with the WHO growth standards.
settingStudy participants were recruited from all districts in Zimbabwe.
methodsHeight-for-age and weight-for-age data collected from 32 248 children were used to develop the Zimbabwean references. Smooth growth curves (height, weight and body mass index [BMI]-for-age) were estimated with the Lambda Mu Sigma (LMS) method and compared with the WHO growth standards.
resultsZimbabwean children were shorter and weighed less in comparison with the WHO growth standards. The -2 standard deviation (s.d.) Z-score curves (height-for-age) for Zimbabwean children (boys and girls) were below the -1 s.d. Z-score curves of the WHO growth standards. The Zimbabwean Z-scores (BMI-for-age) values above -1 s.d. were significantly higher in comparison with the corresponding WHO growth standards.
conclusionUtilising the WHO growth standards would diagnose a higher proportion of Zimbabwean children as stunted whilst underestimating the proportion at risk of obesity. The WHO growth standards lack a consideration of the geographical, economic, political and environmental constraints existing between countries.
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.