ArticleFrontiers in pediatrics2023
Comparison of Intergrowth-21st and Fenton growth standards to evaluate and predict the postnatal growth in eastern Chinese preterm infants.
Article in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fenton vs INTERGROWTH-21st charts in preterm infants < 32 weeks: impact of chart selection on growth classification.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Article
- Article
- Classification of very low birth weight infants as small for gestational age: International vs. national standards.PloS one · 2025Article
- Extrauterine growth restriction in very-low-birthweight infants: prevalence and concordance according to Fenton, Olsen, and INTERGROWTH-21st growth charts in a multicenter Spanish cohort.European journal of pediatrics · 2024Observational
- Impact of the Choice of Diagnostic Criteria and Growth Reference on the Prevalence of Extrauterine Growth Restriction in Extremely-Low-Birthweight Infants.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Postnatal Growth Assessment and Prediction of Neurodevelopment and Long-Term Growth in Very Low Birth Weight Infants: A Nationwide Cohort Study in Korea.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this article was to compare the differences between Intergrowth-21st (IG-21) and Fenton growth standards in the classification of intrauterine and extrauterine growth restriction (EUGR) in eastern Chinese preterm infants, and detect which one can better relate to neonatal diseases and predict the physical growth outcomes at 3-5 years old. Methods: Premature infants admitted to a tertiary pediatric hospital in Shanghai, China, from 2016 to 2018 were enrolled. Prenatal information, neonatal diseases during hospitalization, and anthropometric data (weight, height, and head circumference) at birth and at discharge were collected and analyzed. Physical growth outcomes (short stature, thinness, and overweight) were examined by telephone investigations in 2021 at age 3-5 years. Results: The medium gestational age and birth weight of the included 1,065 preterm newborns were 33.6 weeks and 1,900 g, respectively. The IG-21 curves diagnosed more newborns with small for gestational age (SGA) (19% vs. 14.7%) and fewer newborns with longitudinal EUGR on height (25.5% vs. 27.9%) and head circumference (17.9% vs. 24.7%) compared to Fenton curves. Concordances between Fenton and IG-21 standards were substantial or almost perfect in the classification of SGA and longitudinal EUGR, but minor in cross-sectional EUGR. EUGR identified by Fenton curves was better related to neonatal diseases than IG-21 curves. There were no statistical significances in the prediction of short stature, thinness, and overweight at 3-5 years old between the two charts. Conclusions: IG-21 growth standards are not superior to Fenton in assessing preterm growth and development in the eastern Chinese population.
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.