ArticleAmerican journal of biological anthropology2026
Estimating Mean Growth Trajectories When Measurements Are Sparse and Age Is Uncertain.
Article in American journal of biological anthropology, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesComparing children's growth across the world and at different moments in history can yield insight into both health challenges and healthy morphological variation in humans. A difficulty of such comparative analyses is that, in marginalized populations, there are often logistical complications to obtaining repeat measures of individual children's height and weight. The problem is even more acute for historical populations: bioarcheological datasets comprise single measures of individuals at death. Additionally, for both contemporary and historical populations, there is often non-trivial uncertainty about children's ages. Both of these factors complicate estimation of growth trajectories. Here we evaluate the degree to which we can accurately estimate a population-mean growth trajectory using only a small number of (randomly) uncertain measurements, like those that compose many contemporary and bioarcheological datasets. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe recently derived a causal model of human growth from fundamental principles of metabolism and allometry, permitting exploration of genetic and environmental contributions to children's growth. Here, we fit this model in a Bayesian framework to simulated cross-sectional and longitudinal datasets of varying size, where age is uncertain.
resultsFor large-scale comparisons, reasonably accurate population-mean growth trajectories may be obtained from single height measures of 100 children of a given sex and a range of ages. However, detailed analyses of pubertal growth spurts and the metabolic and allometric parameters underlying growth require longitudinal datasets. DISCUSSION: We conclude that this new model and estimation strategy constitute a potentially useful toolkit for comparing mean growth trajectories across contemporary and historical populations.
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.