ArticleChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Can Adults Accurately Judge Child Weight Status?
Article in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesThis study addresses two questions: what body sizes/shapes do participants believe correspond to the boundaries of the National Child Measurement Programme (NCMP) weight categories for children aged 4-5 and 10-11 years old, and are these judgements altered by using terminology encouraging positive action by parents?
methodsThe study used photorealistic computer-generated stimuli based on 388 3D scans of children in a method of adjustment task. We first asked participants to estimate the boundaries between weight status categories as described by the NCMP. To test validity, we asked a second set of participants to estimate the body that represented exemplars of each weight category (the exemplars should fall between the boundary estimates). We then recruited a third set of participants to determine whether substituting positive action terminology for the weight status definitions altered the boundary positions.
resultsFirst, validity was confirmed. Second, we found a compressed response range (lower weights overestimated and higher weights underestimated) for the positioning of both categorical boundaries and exemplars. Finally, the use of alternative weight status terminology resulted in an upward shift in the position of all boundaries in the BMI spectrum but failed to remove the compressive stimulus response effect. DISCUSSION: There is a disconnect between the child size that people perceive to correspond to the different weight categories and the size criteria used by health professionals, and it is likely that this gap can only be bridged by training to recognise the medically based categories.
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.