BACKGROUND: Using inadequate growth references when screening child health could lead to false conclusions concerning individual growth. We were concerned that this might apply to the official Danish growth reference. AIM: The study aimed to describe the current growth pattern of 0-1-year-old children in Denmark and compare it with national and international references, especially concerning differences that might cause misclassification regarding growth. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The study population comprised the Copenhagen County Child Cohort 2000 (CCCC2000) birth cohort, which consisted of 6090 children born during the year 2000. Weight and length measurements were obtained from the National Birth Registry and from standardized records of public health nurses. Anthropometric measurements were available from 99% of the birth cohort. Growth curves were constructed using Cole's LMS method. The curves were compared with Danish and international references, including the NCHS, the CDC and the Euro Growth references. RESULTS: The CCCC2000 curves differed from all the chosen references. The CCCC2000 children were heavier and longer and with a substantially higher weight-for-age gain between 1 and 6 months. Shape-wise, the CCCC2000 weight curves resemble the new Euro Growth reference. CONCLUSIONS: The degree of differences concerning weight curves is large enough to cause misclassification and there seems to be a need for updated growth curves concerning infancy.
BACKGROUND: Using inadequate growth references when screening child health could lead to false conclusions concerning individual growth. We were concerned that this might apply to the official Danish growth reference. AIM: The study aimed to describe the current growth pattern of 0-1-year-old children in Denmark and compare it with national and international references, especially concerning differences that might cause misclassification regarding growth. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The study population comprised the Copenhagen County Child Cohort 2000 (CCCC2000) birth cohort, which consisted of 6090 children born during the year 2000. Weight and length measurements were obtained from the National Birth Registry and from standardized records of public health nurses. Anthropometric measurements were available from 99% of the birth cohort. Growth curves were constructed using Cole's LMS method. The curves were compared with Danish and international references, including the NCHS, the CDC and the Euro Growth references. RESULTS: The CCCC2000 curves differed from all the chosen references. The CCCC2000 children were heavier and longer and with a substantially higher weight-for-age gain between 1 and 6 months. Shape-wise, the CCCC2000 weight curves resemble the new Euro Growth reference. CONCLUSIONS: The degree of differences concerning weight curves is large enough to cause misclassification and there seems to be a need for updated growth curves concerning infancy.