ReviewFrontiers in endocrinology2026
Exploratory secondary analysis of published aggregate growth and metabolic data in children born small for gestational age treated with growth hormone.
Review in Frontiers in endocrinology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To describe published annual growth and metabolic summaries for children born small for gestational age (SGA) treated with growth hormone and to define the limits of inference from aggregate registry data. Methods: We conducted an exploratory secondary analysis of published aggregate means, standard deviations, and outcome-specific sample sizes from baseline through year 5 in the SGA subgroup of the Korean LG Growth Study, with up to 318 children represented at baseline. Primary reporting was descriptive and included annual values, changes from baseline, and measurement availability. Exploratory slope models were retained only as supplementary sensitivity analyses. The published aggregate LGS summaries available for the present secondary analysis did not include longitudinal blood-pressure measurements or cardiovascular-event records. Results: Height SDS was -2.38 at baseline and -0.76 at year 5, weight SDS was -2.21 and -0.84, and BMI SDS was -0.93 and -0.64. The published mean AST was 32.07 IU/L at baseline and 24.28 IU/L at year 5, whereas several other metabolic markers had higher year-5 means. Median year-5 measurement availability was 12.8% of outcome-specific baseline counts, and only six triglyceride measurements were available at year 5. The markedly reduced outcome-specific sample sizes at later follow-up points substantially limit interpretation of long-term patterns. Conclusion: Published annual mean values differed across follow-up, but changing outcome-specific samples and the unavailability of individual-level longitudinal data to the present secondary analysis preclude estimation of within-child change, causal treatment effects, or cardiovascular risk.
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.