ArticlePloS one2024
Allometric multi-scaling of weight-for-height relation in children and adolescents: Revisiting the theoretical basis of body mass index of thinness and obesity assessment.
Article in PloS one, 2024. 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.
- Untangling weight from height: A generalised body mass index (gBMI) approach to evaluating child and adolescent nutritional status in India.The Indian journal of medical research · 2026Article
- Has the BMI had its day?International journal of obesity (2005) · 2025Article
- Multi-scaling allometry in human development, mammalian morphology, and tree growth.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Age- and height-dependent bias of underweight and overweight assessment standards for children and adolescents.Frontiers in public health · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The body mass index (BMI), defined as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared, has been widely used to assess thinness and obesity in all age groups, including children and adolescents. However, the validity and utility of BMI as a reliable measure of nutritional health have been questioned. This study discusses the mathematical conditions that support the validity of BMI based on population statistics. Here, we propose a condition defined as allometric uni-scaling to ensure the validity of BMI as an objective height-adjusted measure. Any given centile curve, including the median curve, in a weight-for-height distribution should be approximated using power-law functions with the same scaling exponent. In contrast, when the scaling exponent varies depending on the position of the centile curve, it is called allometric multi-scaling. By introducing a method for testing these scaling properties using quantile regression, we analyzed a large-scale Japanese database that included 7,863,520 children aged 5-17 years. We demonstrated the remarkable multi-scaling properties at ages 5-13 years for males and 5-11 years for females, and the convergence to uni-scaling with a scaling exponent close to 2 as they approached 17 years of age for both sexes. We confirmed that conventional BMI is appropriate as an objective height-adjusted mass measure at least 17 years of age, close to adulthood, for both males and females. However, the validity of BMI could not be confirmed in younger age groups. Our findings indicate that the growth of children's weight-for-height relation is much more complex than previously assumed. Therefore, a single BMI-type formula cannot be used to assess thinness and obesity in children and adolescents.
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.