ArticleBMC pediatrics2025
Growth impairment in glycogen storage disease type I versus types III/VI/IX: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC pediatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- RNA sequencing resolves a novel noncanonical splice-region variant inTranslational pediatrics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGrowth retardation is common in glycogen storage disease (GSD), though the relative contributions of hormonal and metabolic factors remain unclear. We compared clinical and biochemical features between GSD I and non-GSD I patients and identified independent predictors of height standard deviation score (SDS).
methodsThirty-eight children with GSD (24 with GSD I; 14 with GSD III/VI/IX; mean age: 7.5 years) underwent evaluation of height SDS, BMI SDS, IGF1 SDS, and metabolic parameters. After excluding three patients with inflammatory bowel disease (final n = 35), multiple regression was used to identify factors associated with height SDS. In GSD I (n = 24), Lasso regression selected variables, and 1,000 bootstrap resamples assessed coefficient stability.
resultsGSD I patients had lower height SDS (-2.30 vs. - 1.17; p = 0.021) and higher lactate (3.94 vs. 1.48 mmol/L; p < 0.001), uric acid (431.04 vs. 283.79µmol/L; p < 0.001) and triglyceride levels (2.38 vs. 1.29 mmol/L, p = 0.002) compared to non-GSD I. In combined-cohort regression, lactate was the only independent negative predictor of height SDS (p = 0.011); glucose levels and IGF1 SDS did not reach statistical significance. In GSD I, Lasso retained lactate (β = - 0.682), glucose (β = - 0.625), and IGF1 SDS (β = 0.524), and bootstrap validation showed only IGF1 SDS remained consistently significant.
conclusionsHyperlactatemia is significant predictor of growth impairment in GSD, while IGF1 is a stable predictor in GSD I. These findings highlight metabolic and hormonal targets for future hypothesis-driven research in this 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.