Literature DB >> 8148716

Do growth chart centiles need a face lift?

T J Cole1.   

Abstract

European height and weight growth charts commonly extend from the 3rd to the 97th centile, whereas in North America the extremes are usually the 5th and 95th centiles. There is no good reason for the difference, and neither chart is particularly useful for screening owing to the high false positive rate associated with a cut off based on the lowest centile. The World Health Organisation's international growth reference uses cut offs based on standard deviation scores rather than centiles, which are more suitable for the extremes of growth status seen in the developing world. This chart, however, is incompatible with charts based on centiles. Here a unified growth chart is proposed: it has nine rather than seven centiles, and they are spaced two thirds of a standard deviation score apart rather than the more usual unit spacing. This gives a set of curves very like the conventional 3rd to 97th centiles, but with additional curves at 2.67 standard deviation below and above the mean (roughly the 0.4th and 99.6th centiles). The 0.4th centile is a more practical cut off for screening purposes than the 3rd or 5th centile.

Keywords:  Anthropometry; Biology; Body Height; Body Weight; Child Development; Growth; Measurement; Physiology; Research Methodology; Theoretical Studies

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8148716      PMCID: PMC2539730          DOI: 10.1136/bmj.308.6929.641

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ        ISSN: 0959-8138


  3 in total

1.  Distribution-free estimation of age-related centiles.

Authors:  M J Healy; J Rasbash; M Yang
Journal:  Ann Hum Biol       Date:  1988 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.533

2.  Development of normalized curves for the international growth reference: historical and technical considerations.

Authors:  M J Dibley; J B Goldsby; N W Staehling; F L Trowbridge
Journal:  Am J Clin Nutr       Date:  1987-11       Impact factor: 7.045

3.  Standards from birth to maturity for height, weight, height velocity, and weight velocity: British children, 1965. I.

Authors:  J M Tanner; R H Whitehouse; M Takaishi
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  1966-10       Impact factor: 3.791

  3 in total
  43 in total

1.  UK reference data for the Hologic QDR Discovery dual-energy x ray absorptiometry scanner in healthy children and young adults aged 6-17 years.

Authors:  Kate A Ward; Rebecca L Ashby; Steven A Roberts; Judith E Adams; M Zulf Mughal
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  2006-08-30       Impact factor: 3.791

Review 2.  An assessment of growth hormone provocation tests.

Authors:  P C Hindmarsh; P G Swift
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 3.791

3.  New chart to evaluate weight faltering.

Authors:  C Wright; A Avery; M Epstein; E Birks; D Croft
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 3.791

4.  The survivors of gastroschisis.

Authors:  B W Davies; M D Stringer
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 3.791

5.  Function of infant-directed speech.

Authors:  M Monnot
Journal:  Hum Nat       Date:  1999-12

6.  Growth of Pakistani children in relation to the 1990 growth standards.

Authors:  A M Kelly; N J Shaw; A M Thomas; P B Pynsent; D J Baker
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  1997-11       Impact factor: 3.791

7.  Cross sectional stature and weight reference curves for the UK, 1990.

Authors:  J V Freeman; T J Cole; S Chinn; P R Jones; E M White; M A Preece
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 3.791

8.  Monitoring children's growth.

Authors:  D M Hall
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-09-02

9.  Growth failure and outcome in Rett syndrome: specific growth references.

Authors:  Daniel Charles Tarquinio; Kathleen J Motil; Wei Hou; Hye-Seung Lee; Daniel G Glaze; Steven A Skinner; Jeff L Neul; Fran Annese; Lauren McNair; Judy O Barrish; Suzanne P Geerts; Jane B Lane; Alan K Percy
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2012-10-03       Impact factor: 9.910

10.  Downward percentile crossing as an indicator of an adverse prenatal environment.

Authors:  Michelle Lampl; Francesca Gotsch; Juan Pedro Kusanovic; Jimmy Espinoza; Luis Gonçalves; Ricardo Gomez; Jyh Kae Nien; Edward A Frongillo; Roberto Romero
Journal:  Ann Hum Biol       Date:  2008 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 1.533

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.