ArticleMaternal & child nutrition2024
Factors associated with physical growth status among children aged 12-59 months in the Japanese National Growth Survey on Preschool Children: A retrospective analysis.
Article in Maternal & child nutrition, 2024. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors associated with physical growth status among children aged 12-59 months in the Japanese National Growth Survey on Preschool Children: A retrospective analysis.Maternal & child nutrition · 2024Article
- Nutrition in a lifecourse perspective: From molecular aspects to public health approaches.Maternal & child nutrition · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed to examine the factors associated with physical growth status among children aged 12-59 months in Japan. Data from the 2010 National Growth Survey on Preschool Children, a nationwide cross-sectional survey, were used for this analysis (n = 4196). After adjustment for confounding factors, multiple logistic regression analyses showed that boys who were born small-for-gestational-age were more likely to be underweight (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 12.55, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [6.76-23.3], p < 0.001), stunted (aOR: 5.78, 95% CI: [3.48-9.60], p < 0.001) and wasted (aOR: 7.02, 95% CI: [3.30-15.0], p < 0.001), while boys who were large-for-gestational-age were less likely to be stunted (aOR: 0.26, 95% CI: [0.11-0.60], p < 0.01). Girls who were born small-for-gestational-age were more likely to be underweight (aOR: 5.42, 95% CI: [2.73-10.7], p < 0.001), stunted (aOR: 4.04, 95% CI: [2.43-6.73], p < 0.001) and wasted (aOR: 6.27, 95% CI: [2.55-15.4], p < 0.001), while girls who were large-for-gestational age were more likely to be overweight (aOR: 5.90, 95% CI: [1.64-21.3], p < 0.001). Moreover, the following factors were associated with the physical growth status in children: maternal prepregnancy body mass index, complications during pregnancy, continuous breastfeeding, initiation age of complementary feeding, smoking status of the father or those living with the mother during pregnancy and birth order. Further research is needed to expand support for high-risk families and to verify their effectiveness.
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.