Novel growth reference ImaGrow differed from existing charts for preterm children aged 0-2 years.

AIM: This study aimed to address the critical need for more accurate growth reference charts for preterm infants, with a particular focus on low- and very low-birth-weight infants. METHODS: The subjects were recruited at a single tertiary centre. The cohort comprised singleton and twin infants born before 37 weeks of gestation, with data collected from 2000 to 2016. Standardised measurements of body parameters were recorded in this mixed longitudinal survey. LMS method was utilised for data analysis. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS Statistics Version 21. The validation with another new cohort was executed. RESULTS: A total of 1781 infants (52.5% boys) met the inclusion criteria. The median gestational age at birth was 30 weeks, with a median birth weight of 1350 grams. The main findings included the construction of ImaGrow charts for low- and very low-birth-weight infants and significant differences in growth trajectories compared to Fenton+WHO charts. CONCLUSION: Our comprehensive growth references, ImaGrow, are based on a long-term auxological assessment of preterm infants and differ from charts derived from size-at-birth standards or charts for term babies. These charts have significant implications for clinical practice in monitoring and assessing the growth of preterm infants.

Height-for-age and weight-for-age growth charts for Pakistani infants under six months: derived from a novel case selection method using multiple indicator cluster survey data.

BACKGROUND: In the past two decades, there has been a growing recognition of the need to establish indigenous standards or reference growth charts, particularly following the WHO multicenter growth study in 2006. The availability of accurate and reliable growth charts is crucial for monitoring child health. The choice of an appropriate model for constructing growth charts depends on various data characteristics, including the distribution's tails and peak. While Pakistan has reported some reference growth charts, there is a notable absence of indigenous charts for children under two years of age, especially for infants aged 0-6 months who are exclusively breastfed. Additionally, acquiring data poses a significant challenge, particularly for low-income countries, as it demands substantial resources such as finances, time, and expertise. The Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (MICS) constitutes a large-scale national survey conducted periodically in low-income countries under the auspices of UNICEF. In this study, we propose methods for generating selection variables utilizing the "Novel Case Selection Method," as previously published. Further our approach enables to select and fit appropriate model to the MICS data, selected, and to develop the standard growth charts. METHODS: Out of the 11,478 children under 6 months of age included in MICS-6 (Pakistan), 3,655 children (1,831 males and 1,824 females) met the specified criteria and were selected using the "Novel Case Selection Method". The sample was distributed across provinces as follows: 841 (23.0%) from KPK, 1,464 (40.1%) from Punjab, 819 (22.4%) from Sindh, and 531 (14.5%) from Balochistan. This sample encompassed both rural (76.4%) and urban (23.6%) populations. Following data cleaning and outlier removal, a total of 3,540 records for weight (1,768 males and 1,772 females) and 3,515 records for height (1,759 males and 1,756 females) were ultimately available for the development of standard charts. The Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) was employed to determine the optimal degrees of freedom for L, M, and S using RefCurv_0.4.2. Three families within the gamlss class-namely, Box Cox Cole and Green (BCCG), Box Cox T (BCT), and Box Cox Power Exponential (BCPE)-were applied, each with three smoothing techniques: penalized splines (ps), cubic splines (cs), and polynomial splines (poly). The best-fitted model was selected from these nine combinations based on the Akaike Information Criteria. RESULTS: The Novel Case Selection Method yielded 3655 cases as per criteria. After cleaning the data, this method lead to selection of 3540 children for "weight for age" (W/A) and 3515 children for "height for age" (H/A). The "BCPE" family and "ps" as smoothing method proved to be best on AIC for all four curves, i.e. the W/A male, W/A female, H/A male, and H/A female. The optimum selected degrees of freedom for the curve "W/A", for both genders were (M = 1, L = 0, S = 0). The optimum degrees of freedom for H/A male were again (M = 1, L = 0, S = 0), but for females the selected degrees of freedom were (M = 1, L = 1, S = 1). The indigenous fitted standard curves for Pakistan were on lower trajectory in comparison to WHO standards. CONCLUSION: This study uses the Novel Case Selection Method with introduced algorithms to construct tailored growth charts for lower and middle-income countries. Leveraging extensive MICS data, the methodology ensures representative national samples. The resulting charts hold practical value and await validation from established data sources, offering valuable tools for policy makers and clinicians in diverse global contexts.

Evaluating national guidelines for monitoring early growth using routinely collected data in Bergen, Norway.

AIMS: The overarching aim of this study was to evaluate the Norwegian guidelines for growth monitoring using routinely collected data from healthy children up to five years of age. We analysed criteria for both status (size for age) and change (centile crossing) in growth. METHODS: Longitudinal data were obtained from the electronic health record (EHR) at the well-baby clinic for 2130 children included in the Bergen growth study 1 (BGS1). Measurements of length, weight, weight-for-length, body mass index (BMI) and head circumference were converted to z-scores and compared with the World Health Organization (WHO) growth standards and the national growth reference. RESULTS: Using the WHO growth standard, the proportion of children above +2SD was generally higher than the expected 2.3% for all traits at birth and for length at all ages. Crossing percentile channels was common during the first two years of life, particularly for length/height. By the age of five years, 37.9% of the children had been identified for follow-up regarding length/height, 33% for head circumference and 13.6% for high weight-for-length/BMI. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of children beyond the normal limits of the charts is higher than expected, and a surprisingly large number of children were identified for rules concerning length or growth in head circumference. This suggests the need for a revision of the current guidelines for growth monitoring in Norway.

Implications for quantifying early life growth trajectories of term-born infants using INTERGROWTH-21st newborn size standards at birth in conjunction with World Health Organization child growth standards in the postnatal period.

BACKGROUND: The INTERGROWTH-21st sex and gestational age (GA) specific newborn size standards (IG-NS) are intended to complement the World Health Organization Child Growth Standards (WHO-GS), which are not GA-specific. We examined the implications of using IG-NS at birth and WHO-GS at postnatal ages in longitudinal epidemiologic studies. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to quantify the extent to which standardised measures of newborn size and growth are affected when using WHO-GS versus IG-NS at birth among term-born infants. METHODS: Data from two prenatal trials in Bangladesh (n = 755) and The Gambia (n = 522) were used to estimate and compare size at birth and growth from birth to 3 months when using WHO-GS only ('WHO-GS') versus IG-NS at birth and WHO-GS postnatally ('IG-NS'). Mean length-for-age (LAZ), weight-for-age (WAZ) and head circumference-for-age (HCAZ), and the prevalence of undernutrition (stunting: LAZ < -2SD; underweight: WAZ < -2SD; and microcephaly: HCAZ < -2SD) were estimated overall and by GA strata [early-term (370/7 -386/7 ), full-term (390/7 -406/7 ) and late-term (410/7 -430/7 )]. We used Bland-Altman plots to compare continuous indices and Kappa statistic to compare categorical indicators. RESULTS: At birth, mean LAZ, WAZ and HCAZ, and the prevalence of undernutrition were most similar among newborns between 39 and 40 weeks of GA when using WHO-GS versus IG-NS. However, anthropometric indices were systematically lower among early-term infants and higher among late-term infants when using WHO-GS versus IG-NS. Early-term and late-term infants demonstrated relatively faster and slower growth, respectively, when using WHO-GS versus IG-NS, with the direction and magnitude of differences varying between anthropometric indices. Individual-level differences in attained size and growth, when using WHO-GS versus IG-NS, were greater than 0.2 SD in magnitude for >60% of infants across all anthropometric indices. CONCLUSIONS: Using IG-NS at birth with WHO-GS postnatally is acceptable for full-term infants but may give a misleading interpretation of growth trajectories among early- and late-term infants.

Effect of Correcting the Postnatal Age of Preterm-Born Children on Measures of Associations Between Infant Length-for-Age z Scores and Mid-Childhood Outcomes.

Child growth standards are commonly used to derive age- and sex-standardized anthropometric indices but are often inappropriately applied to preterm-born children (<37 weeks of gestational age (GA)) in epidemiology studies. Using the 2004 Pelotas Birth Cohort, we examined the impact of correcting for GA in the application of child growth standards on the magnitude and direction of associations in 2 a priori-selected exposure-outcome scenarios: infant length-for-age z score (LAZ) and mid-childhood body mass index (scenario A), and infant LAZ and mid-childhood intelligence quotient (scenario B). GA was a confounder that had a strong (scenario A) or weak (scenario B) association with the outcome. Compared with uncorrected postnatal age, using GA-corrected postnatal age attenuated the magnitude of associations, particularly in early infancy, and changed inferences for associations at birth. Although differences in the magnitude of associations were small when GA was weakly associated with the outcome, model fit was meaningfully improved using corrected postnatal age. When estimating population-averaged associations with early childhood growth in studies where preterm- and term-born children are included, incorporating heterogeneity in GA at birth in the age scale used to standardize anthropometric indices postnatally provides a useful strategy to reduce standardization errors.

Dichorionic twin-specific vs singleton growth references for diagnosis of fetal growth restriction.

BACKGROUND: Fetal growth restriction is associated with an increased risk for adverse neonatal outcomes. The Hadlock singleton growth reference is widely used to determine the estimated fetal weight percentile for both twin and singleton gestations. The Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development's twin-specific growth reference accounts for the different growth trajectory that twins follow during gestation. There is a lack of research comparing these different growth references in their ability to identify fetal growth restriction that is associated with adverse neonatal outcomes in dichorionic twin gestations. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare a twin-specific growth reference (the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development's twin-specific growth reference) and a singleton growth reference (Hadlock) in their ability to identify fetal growth restriction associated with adverse neonatal outcomes in dichorionic twin gestations. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study of dichorionic twin gestations at ≥32 weeks' gestation delivered at a single institution between 2004 and 2019 with the serial growth ultrasounds and neonatal outcomes data available for analysis. Using their last growth ultrasound before delivery, twins were classified into the following 3 categories: fetal growth restriction according to both the Hadlock and Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development references, fetal growth restriction according to the Hadlock reference only, and no fetal growth restriction according to either reference, with fetal growth restriction defined as an estimated fetal weight of <10th percentile for gestational age. Multivariable generalized linear mixed models were used to assess the adverse neonatal outcomes via pair-wise comparisons between the groups, with a random-effects component to account for twin-pair correlations. RESULTS: A total of 1460 dichorionic twin infants were included with 8.1% (n=118) of cases classified as fetal growth restricted by both the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and Hadlock references, 8.8% (n=129) of cases classified as fetal growth restricted by the Hadlock reference only, and 83.1% (n=1213) of cases classified as no fetal growth restriction by either reference. Compared with twins with no fetal growth restriction by either reference, twins with fetal growth restriction by both references were more likely to experience mild (adjusted odds ratio, 2.38; confidence interval, 1.38-4.13) or severe (adjusted odds ratio, 2.82; confidence interval, 1.16-6.88) composite neonatal morbidity. Compared with twins with fetal growth restriction according to the Hadlock reference only, twins with fetal growth restriction according to both references were more likely to experience mild (adjusted odds ratio, 2.03; confidence interval, 1.00-4.14) but not severe (adjusted odds ratio, 3.70; confidence interval, 0.72-18.90) composite neonatal morbidity. Composite neonatal morbidity was not different between twins with fetal growth restriction according to the Hadlock reference only and those with no fetal growth restriction by either growth reference. CONCLUSION: The Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development's twin-specific growth reference better identifies the risk for adverse neonatal outcomes in dichorionic twin gestations diagnosed with fetal growth restriction. The use of the Hadlock singleton growth reference more than doubles the number of dichorionic twins identified with fetal growth restriction who seem to be at a low-risk for neonatal morbidity, leading to unnecessary maternal anxiety, increased antenatal testing, and possibly iatrogenic preterm delivery.

Performance of six birth-weight and estimated-fetal-weight standards for predicting adverse perinatal outcome: a 10-year nationwide population-based study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate three birth-weight (BW) standards (Australian population-based, Fenton and INTERGROWTH-21st ) and three estimated-fetal-weight (EFW) standards (Hadlock, INTERGROWTH-21st and WHO) for classifying small-for-gestational age (SGA) and large-for-gestational age (LGA) and predicting adverse perinatal outcomes in preterm and term babies. METHODS: This was a nationwide population-based study conducted on a total of 2.4 million singleton births that occurred from 24 + 0 to 40 + 6 weeks' gestation between 2004 and 2013 in Australia. The performance of the growth charts was evaluated according to SGA and LGA classification, and relative risk (RR) and diagnostic accuracy based on the areas under the receiver-operating-characteristics curves (AUCs) for stillbirth, neonatal death, perinatal death, composite morbidity and a composite of perinatal death and morbidity outcomes. The analysis was stratified according to gestational age at delivery (< 37 + 0 vs ≥ 37 + 0 weeks). RESULTS: Following exclusions, 2 392 782 singleton births were analyzed. There were significant differences in the SGA and LGA classification and risk of adverse outcomes between the six BW and EFW standards evaluated. For the term group, compared with the other standards, the INTERGROWTH-21st BW and EFW standards classified half the number of SGA (< 10th centile) babies (3-4% vs 7-11%) and twice the number of LGA (> 90th centile) babies (24-25% vs 8-15%), resulting in a smaller cohort of term SGA at higher risk of adverse outcome and a larger LGA cohort at lower risk of adverse outcome. For term SGA (< 3rd centile) babies, the RR of perinatal death using the two INTERGROWTH-21st standards was up to 1.5-fold higher than those of the other standards (including the WHO-EFW and Hadlock-EFW), while the INTERGROWTH-21st -EFW standard indicated a 12-26% reduced risk of perinatal death for LGA cases across centile thresholds. Conversely, for the preterm group, the WHO-EFW and Hadlock-EFW standards identified a higher SGA classification rate than did the other standards (18-19% vs 10-11%) and a 20-65% increased risk of perinatal death in term LGA babies. All BW and EFW charts had similarly poor performance in predicting adverse outcomes, including the composite outcome (AUC range, 0.49-0.62) for both preterm (AUC range, 0.58-0.62) and term (AUC range, 0.49-0.50) cases and across centiles. Furthermore, specific centile thresholds for identifying adverse outcomes varied markedly by chart between BW and EFW standards. CONCLUSIONS: This study addresses the recurrent problem of identifying fetuses at risk of morbidity and perinatal mortality associated with growth disorders and provides new insights into the applicability of international growth standards. Our findings of marked variation in classification and the similarly poor performance of prescriptive international standards and the other commonly used standards raise questions about whether the prescriptive international standards that were constructed for universal adoption are indeed applicable to a multiethnic population such as that of Australia. Thus, caution is needed when adopting universal standards for clinical and epidemiological use. © 2020 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Fetal growth standards for Chinese twin pregnancies.

BACKGROUND: The common use of singleton fetal growth standard to access twin growth might lead to over-monitoring and treatment. We aimed to develop fetal growth standards for Chinese twins based on ultrasound measurements, and compare it with Zhang's and other twin fetal growth charts. METHODS: A cohort of uncomplicated twin pregnancies were prospectively followed in 2014-2017. Smoothed estimates of fetal growth percentiles for both monochorionic (MC) and dichorionic (DC) twins were obtained using a linear mixed model. We also created growth charts for twins using a model-based approach proposed by Zhang et al. Our twin standards were compared with Hadlock's (singleton) in predicting adverse perinatal outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 398 twin pregnancies were included, with 214 MC and 582 DC live-born twins. The MC twins were slightly lighter than the DC twins, with small differences throughout the gestation. Our ultrasound-based fetal weight standards were comparable to that using Zhang's method. Compared with previous references/standards from the US, Brazil, Italy and UK, our twins had very similar 50th percentiles, but narrower ranges between the 5th and 95th or 10th and 90th percentiles. Compared with the Hadlock's standard, the risks of neonatal death and adverse perinatal outcomes for small for gestational age (SGA) versus non-SGA were substantially elevated using our standards. CONCLUSIONS: A normal fetal growth standard for Chinese twins was created. The differences between MC and DC twins were clinically insignificant. The 50th weight percentiles of the Chinese twins were identical to those in other races/ethnicities but the ranges were markedly narrower. Our standard performed much better than the Hadlock's in predicting low birth weight infants associated with adverse perinatal outcomes in twin pregnancies. The present study also indicated that Zhang's method is applicable to Chinese twins, and other areas may use Zhang's method to generate their own curves for twins if deemed necessary.

Which growth standards should be used to identify large- and small-for-gestational age infants of mothers with type 1 diabetes? A pre-specified analysis of the CONCEPTT trial.

BACKGROUND: Offspring of women with type 1 diabetes are at increased risk of fetal growth patterns which are associated with perinatal morbidity. Our aim was to compare rates of large- and small-for-gestational age (LGA; SGA) defined according to different criteria, using data from the Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Type 1 Diabetes Pregnancy Trial (CONCEPTT). METHODS: This was a pre-specified analysis of CONCEPTT involving 225 pregnant women and liveborn infants from 31 international centres ( ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01788527; registered 11/2/2013). Infants were weighed immediately at birth and GROW, INTERGROWTH and WHO centiles were calculated. Relative risk ratios, sensitivity and specificity were used to assess the different growth standards with respect to perinatal outcomes, including neonatal hypoglycaemia, hyperbilirubinaemia, respiratory distress, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission and a composite neonatal outcome. RESULTS: Accelerated fetal growth was common, with mean birthweight percentiles of 82.1, 85.7 and 63.9 and LGA rates of 62, 67 and 30% using GROW, INTERGROWTH and WHO standards respectively. Corresponding rates of SGA were 2.2, 1.3 and 8.9% respectively. LGA defined according to GROW centiles showed stronger associations with preterm delivery, neonatal hypoglycaemia, hyperbilirubinaemia and NICU admission. Infants born > 97.7th centile were at highest risk of complications. SGA defined according to INTERGROWTH centiles showed slightly stronger associations with perinatal outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: GROW and INTERGROWTH standards performed similarly and identified similar numbers of neonates with LGA and SGA. GROW-defined LGA and INTERGROWTH-defined SGA had slightly stronger associations with neonatal complications. WHO standards underestimated size in preterm infants and are less applicable for use in type 1 diabetes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov . number NCT01788527 . Trial registered 11/2/2013.

Screening of hydrocephalus in infants using either WHO or population-based head circumference reference charts.

AIM: The aim was to compare the performances of the World Health Organization (WHO) and population-based (PB) references in the screening for hydrocephalus in infants aged <2 years. METHODS: We collected 341 longitudinal head circumference (HC) measurements of hydrocephalic infants and 120 181 measurements of 15 145 healthy infants from primary care. The measurements were converted into z-scores, and a new screening parameter, change in HC standard deviation score (SDS) over time (ΔHC SDS), was calculated. Comparisons were made using receiver operating characteristics analysis and linear mixed models. RESULTS: The mean HC SDSWHO was 3.5 and the mean HC SDSPB was 2.9 in the hydrocephalic infants, and in healthy children, those numbers were 1.0 SDSWHO and 0 SDSPB , respectively. The best screening accuracy was obtained with the PB reference in combination with the ΔHC SDS parameter (AUC 0.89). The accuracy of the WHO standard could be improved to a similar level by customising the screening cut-offs of HC SDS according to the population and combining screening parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Auxology alone was not sufficient for the screening of hydrocephalus. The WHO standard should be validated in the population, and population-specific cut-offs for normality defined before its introduction.

Prediction of adverse perinatal outcome by fetal biometry: comparison of customized and population-based standards.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the predictive performance of estimated fetal weight (EFW) percentiles, according to eight growth standards, to detect fetuses at risk for adverse perinatal outcome. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of 3437 African-American women. Population-based (Hadlock, INTERGROWTH-21st , World Health Organization (WHO), Fetal Medicine Foundation (FMF)), ethnicity-specific (Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)), customized (Gestation-Related Optimal Weight (GROW)) and African-American customized (Perinatology Research Branch (PRB)/NICHD) growth standards were used to calculate EFW percentiles from the last available scan prior to delivery. Prediction performance indices and relative risk (RR) were calculated for EFW < 10th and > 90th percentiles, according to each standard, for individual and composite adverse perinatal outcomes. Sensitivity at a fixed (10%) false-positive rate (FPR) and partial (FPR < 10%) and full areas under the receiver-operating-characteristics curves (AUC) were compared between the standards. RESULTS: Ten percent (341/3437) of neonates were classified as small-for-gestational age (SGA) at birth, and of these 16.4% (56/341) had at least one adverse perinatal outcome. SGA neonates had a 1.5-fold increased risk of any adverse perinatal outcome (P < 0.05). The screen-positive rate of EFW < 10th percentile varied from 6.8% (NICHD) to 24.4% (FMF). EFW < 10th percentile, according to all standards, was associated with an increased risk for each of the adverse perinatal outcomes considered (P < 0.05 for all). The highest RRs associated with EFW < 10th percentile for each adverse outcome were 5.1 (95% CI, 2.1-12.3) for perinatal mortality (WHO); 5.0 (95% CI, 3.2-7.8) for perinatal hypoglycemia (NICHD); 3.4 (95% CI, 2.4-4.7) for mechanical ventilation (NICHD); 2.9 (95% CI, 1.8-4.6) for 5-min Apgar score < 7 (GROW); 2.7 (95% CI, 2.0-3.6) for neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission (NICHD); and 2.5 (95% CI, 1.9-3.1) for composite adverse perinatal outcome (NICHD). Although the RR CIs overlapped among all standards for each individual outcome, the RR of composite adverse perinatal outcome in pregnancies with EFW < 10th percentile was higher according to the NICHD (2.46; 95% CI, 1.9-3.1) than the FMF (1.47; 95% CI, 1.2-1.8) standard. The sensitivity for composite adverse perinatal outcome varied substantially between standards, ranging from 15% for NICHD to 32% for FMF, due mostly to differences in FPR; this variation subsided when the FPR was set to the same value (10%). Analysis of AUC revealed significantly better performance for the prediction of perinatal mortality by the PRB/NICHD standard (AUC = 0.70) compared with the Hadlock (AUC = 0.66) and FMF (AUC = 0.64) standards. Evaluation of partial AUC (FPR < 10%) demonstrated that the INTERGROWTH-21st standard performed better than the Hadlock standard for the prediction of NICU admission and mechanical ventilation (P < 0.05 for both). Although fetuses with EFW > 90th percentile were also at risk for any adverse perinatal outcome according to the INTERGROWTH-21st (RR = 1.4; 95% CI, 1.0-1.9) and Hadlock (RR = 1.7; 95% CI, 1.1-2.6) standards, many times fewer cases (2-5-fold lower sensitivity) were detected by using EFW > 90th percentile, rather than EFW < 10th percentile, in screening by these standards. CONCLUSIONS: Fetuses with EFW < 10th percentile or EFW > 90th percentile were at increased risk of adverse perinatal outcomes according to all or some of the eight growth standards, respectively. The RR of a composite adverse perinatal outcome in pregnancies with EFW < 10th percentile was higher for the most-stringent (NICHD) compared with the least-stringent (FMF) standard. The results of the complementary analysis of AUC suggest slightly improved detection of adverse perinatal outcome by more recent population-based (INTERGROWTH-21st ) and customized (PRB/NICHD) standards compared with the Hadlock and FMF standards. Published 2019. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

Larger head circumference in Icelandic children 0-4 years of age compared to the World Health Organization and Swedish growth charts.

AIM: The World Health Organization (WHO) published universal growth standards for children below five year of age in 2006. Traditionally, Swedish growth references have been used to monitor growth of children in Iceland, but it is not yet known how they compare with these reference charts. METHODS: A total of 2128 longitudinal measurements of length or height, 2132 of weight and 2126 of head circumference between birth and four years of age were collected in 1996-2000 from 199 healthy children (53% boys) recruited at Landspitali University Hospital. Measurements were converted to z-scores using the WHO growth standards and Swedish growth references for further analysis with mixed-effects models. RESULTS: Length or height, weight and in particular head circumference largely exceeded the WHO standards, with average z-scores that fluctuated between 0.5 and 1.5. Likewise, the proportion of children with a z-score larger than 2 SD increased about 10-fold. Icelandic children were longer and heavier than their Swedish peers during the first six months of life, but differences were less pronounced thereafter. CONCLUSION: The growth of Icelandic children deviated significantly from the WHO growth standards. Although more comparable to the Swedish references, significant differences were found, suggesting that a national growth reference would be more appropriate.

[Anthropometric indicators of physical development and nutritional status employed in hygiene practice in Russia].

In the current review, we consider the main working methods of Russian hygienists to assess anthropometric indices using a) regional data on (populational) variability of the concerning measurements and b) unified reference data applicable in most regions. An analysis showed that in most cases, the regional standards are based on average values and variabilities derived from a local sample, which can not serve as a working normative. As a result, these so called "standards" do not provide information on how healthy children should develop, and the assessments inferred are difficult to integrate to draw a picture for the whole country. In 2017, the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation recommended the use of the WHO Child Growth Standards and the WHO Growth Reference for the purpose of medical screenings in children and adolescents. These data sets reflect the conditions, that healthy children should attain growing in supportive environment, with adequate nutrition and care. The single set of criteria will allow unifying the data collected in different regions, which is a necessity in communal hygiene and medical statistics. However, additional research is needed to check the validity of the WHO standards and reference to assess physical development and nutritional status in highly anthropologically specific populations, in particular in those indigenous and long-ago adapted to the sharply continental or Arctic climate.

The satisfactory growth and development at 2 years of age of the INTERGROWTH-21st Fetal Growth Standards cohort support its appropriateness for constructing international standards.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization recommends that human growth should be monitored with the use of international standards. However, in obstetric practice, we continue to monitor fetal growth using numerous local charts or equations that are based on different populations for each body structure. Consistent with World Health Organization recommendations, the INTERGROWTH-21st Project has produced the first set of international standards to date pregnancies; to monitor fetal growth, estimated fetal weight, Doppler measures, and brain structures; to measure uterine growth, maternal nutrition, newborn infant size, and body composition; and to assess the postnatal growth of preterm babies. All these standards are based on the same healthy pregnancy cohort. Recognizing the importance of demonstrating that, postnatally, this cohort still adhered to the World Health Organization prescriptive approach, we followed their growth and development to the key milestone of 2 years of age. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether the babies in the INTERGROWTH-21st Project maintained optimal growth and development in childhood. STUDY DESIGN: In the Infant Follow-up Study of the INTERGROWTH-21st Project, we evaluated postnatal growth, nutrition, morbidity, and motor development up to 2 years of age in the children who contributed data to the construction of the international fetal growth, newborn infant size and body composition at birth, and preterm postnatal growth standards. Clinical care, feeding practices, anthropometric measures, and assessment of morbidity were standardized across study sites and documented at 1 and 2 years of age. Weight, length, and head circumference age- and sex-specific z-scores and percentiles and motor development milestones were estimated with the use of the World Health Organization Child Growth Standards and World Health Organization milestone distributions, respectively. For the preterm infants, corrected age was used. Variance components analysis was used to estimate the percentage variability among individuals within a study site compared with that among study sites. RESULTS: There were 3711 eligible singleton live births; 3042 children (82%) were evaluated at 2 years of age. There were no substantive differences between the included group and the lost-to-follow up group. Infant mortality rate was 3 per 1000; neonatal mortality rate was 1.6 per 1000. At the 2-year visit, the children included in the INTERGROWTH-21st Fetal Growth Standards were at the 49th percentile for length, 50th percentile for head circumference, and 58th percentile for weight of the World Health Organization Child Growth Standards. Similar results were seen for the preterm subgroup that was included in the INTERGROWTH-21st Preterm Postnatal Growth Standards. The cohort overlapped between the 3rd and 97th percentiles of the World Health Organization motor development milestones. We estimated that the variance among study sites explains only 5.5% of the total variability in the length of the children between birth and 2 years of age, although the variance among individuals within a study site explains 42.9% (ie, 8 times the amount explained by the variation among sites). An increase of 8.9 cm in adult height over mean parental height is estimated to occur in the cohort from low-middle income countries, provided that children continue to have adequate health, environmental, and nutritional conditions. CONCLUSION: The cohort enrolled in the INTERGROWTH-21st standards remained healthy with adequate growth and motor development up to 2 years of age, which supports its appropriateness for the construction of international fetal and preterm postnatal growth standards.

A new customized fetal growth standard for African American women: the PRB/NICHD Detroit study.

BACKGROUND: The assessment of fetal growth disorders requires a standard. Current nomograms for the assessment of fetal growth in African American women have been derived either from neonatal (rather than fetal) biometry data or have not been customized for maternal ethnicity, weight, height, and parity and fetal sex. OBJECTIVE: We sought to (1) develop a new customized fetal growth standard for African American mothers; and (2) compare such a standard to 3 existing standards for the classification of fetuses as small (SGA) or large (LGA) for gestational age. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study included 4183 women (4001 African American and 182 Caucasian) from the Detroit metropolitan area who underwent ultrasound examinations between 14-40 weeks of gestation (the median number of scans per pregnancy was 5, interquartile range 3-7) and for whom relevant covariate data were available. Longitudinal quantile regression was used to build models defining the "normal" estimated fetal weight (EFW) centiles for gestational age in African American women, adjusted for maternal height, weight, and parity and fetal sex, and excluding pathologic factors with a significant effect on fetal weight. The resulting Perinatology Research Branch/Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (hereinafter, PRB/NICHD) growth standard was compared to 3 other existing standards--the customized gestation-related optimal weight (GROW) standard; the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (hereinafter, NICHD) African American standard; and the multinational World Health Organization (WHO) standard--utilized to screen fetuses for SGA (<10th centile) or LGA (>90th centile) based on the last available ultrasound examination for each pregnancy. RESULTS: First, the mean birthweight at 40 weeks was 133 g higher for neonates born to Caucasian than to African American mothers and 150 g higher for male than female neonates; maternal weight, height, and parity had a positive effect on birthweight. Second, analysis of longitudinal EFW revealed the following features of fetal growth: (1) all weight centiles were about 2% higher for male than for female fetuses; (2) maternal height had a positive effect on EFW, with larger fetuses being affected more (2% increase in the 95th centile of weight for each 10-cm increase in height); and (3) maternal weight and parity had a positive effect on EFW that increased with gestation and varied among the weight centiles. Third, the screen-positive rate for SGA was 7.2% for the NICHD African American standard, 12.3% for the GROW standard, 13% for the WHO standard customized by fetal sex, and 14.4% for the PRB/NICHD customized standard. For all standards, the screen-positive rate for SGA was at least 2-fold higher among fetuses delivered preterm than at term. Fourth, the screen-positive rate for LGA was 8.7% for the GROW standard, 9.2% for the PRB/NICHD customized standard, 10.8% for the WHO standard customized by fetal sex, and 12.3% for the NICHD African American standard. Finally, the highest overall agreement among standards was between the GROW and PRB/NICHD customized standards (Cohen's interrater agreement, kappa = 0.85). CONCLUSION: We developed a novel customized PRB/NICHD fetal growth standard from fetal data in an African American population without assuming proportionality of the effects of covariates, and without assuming that these effects are equal on all centiles of weight; we also provide an easy-to-use centile calculator. This standard classified more fetuses as being at risk for SGA compared to existing standards, especially among fetuses delivered preterm, but classified about the same number of LGA. The comparison among the 4 growth standards also revealed that the most important factor determining agreement among standards is whether they account for the same factors known to affect fetal growth.

Effect of correcting for gestational age at birth on population prevalence of early childhood undernutrition.

BACKGROUND: Postmenstrual and/or gestational age-corrected age (CA) is required to apply child growth standards to children born preterm (< 37 weeks gestational age). Yet, CA is rarely used in epidemiologic studies in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), which may bias population estimates of childhood undernutrition. To evaluate the effect of accounting for GA in the application of growth standards, we used GA-specific standards at birth (INTERGROWTH-21st newborn size standards) in conjunction with CA for preterm-born children in the application of World Health Organization Child Growth Standards postnatally (referred to as 'CA' strategy) versus postnatal age for all children, to estimate mean length-for-age (LAZ) and weight-for-age (WAZ) z scores at 0, 3, 12, 24, and 48-months of age in the 2004 Pelotas (Brazil) Birth Cohort. RESULTS: At birth (n = 4066), mean LAZ was higher and the prevalence of stunting (LAZ < -2) was lower using CA versus postnatal age (mean ± SD): - 0.36 ± 1.19 versus - 0.67 ± 1.32; and 8.3 versus 11.6%, respectively. Odds ratio (OR) and population attributable risk (PAR) of stunting due to preterm birth were attenuated and changed inferences using CA versus postnatal age at birth [OR, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.32 (95% CI 0.95, 1.82) vs 14.7 (95% CI 11.7, 18.4); PAR 3.1 vs 42.9%]; differences in inferences persisted at 3-months. At 12, 24, and 48-months, preterm birth was associated with stunting, but ORs/PARs remained attenuated using CA compared to postnatal age. Findings were similar for weight-for-age z scores. CONCLUSIONS: Population-based epidemiologic studies in LMICs in which GA is unused or unavailable may overestimate the prevalence of early childhood undernutrition and inflate the fraction of undernutrition attributable to preterm birth.

Effects of applying universal fetal growth standards in a Scandinavian multi-ethnic population.

INTRODUCTION: The question of whether universal growth charts can be used in multi-ethnic settings is of general interest. The Intergrowth-21st fetal growth and newborn size standards are suggested to represent optimal fetal growth regardless of country origin. Our aim was to examine whether women fulfilling the strict Intergrowth-21st inclusion criteria were healthier, showed less ethnic differences in fetal growth and newborn size, and less adverse perinatal outcomes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data were drawn from a population-based multi-ethnic cohort of 823 presumably healthy pregnant women in Oslo, Norway. We assessed differences in fetal and neonatal gestational age specific z-scores and compared maternal health parameters, pregnancy and birth complications between pregnancies fulfilling and not fulfilling the Intergrowth-21st criteria. RESULTS: Only 21% of pregnancies enrolled in our cohort fulfilled the Intergrowth-21st criteria. Fetal growth deviated substantially from the new standards, in particular for ethnic Europeans. Ethnic differences persisted in pregnancies fulfilling the criteria. In South Asian fetuses, estimated fetal weight was -0.60 SD (95% confidence interval -1.00, -0.20) lower at 24 gestational weeks, and birthweight was -0.62 SD (-0.95, -0.29) lower, compared with ethnic Europeans. Corresponding numbers for Middle-East/North Africans were -0.13 (-0.62, 0.36) and -0.60 (-1.00, -0.20). Maternal health indicators and birth complications were similar in women fulfilling and not fulfilling the criteria, but the relation depended on ethnic origin. CONCLUSIONS: In an urban multi-ethnic Norwegian population, applying an extensive list of criteria to define "healthy" pregnancies excludes the majority of women but does not cancel ethnic differences in fetal growth.

Growth patterns from birth to 24 months in Chinese children: a birth cohorts study across China.

BACKGROUND: Assessment of child growth is important in detecting under- and over-growth. We aimed to examine the growth patterns of healthy Chinese infants from birth to 24 months. METHODS: This study was based on six recent birth cohorts across China, which provided data (from 2015) on 4251 children (2174 boys, 2077 girls) who were born at term to mothers without gestational or preexisting diabetes, chronic hypertension, preeclampsia, or eclampsia. Analyses were performed using 28,298 longitudinal anthropometric measures in 4251 children and the LMS method to generate smoothed Z-score growth curves, which were compared to the WHO growth standards (which are based on data from 2003) and current Chinese growth references (which are based on data from 2005). RESULTS: Most (80.3%) of mother had college education or more, and maternal smoking was rare (0.4%). Compared to the WHO longitudinal growth standards for children aged 0 to 2 years, the growth references from this longitudinal study (length-, weight-, head circumference-, BMI-for-age, and weight-for-length) were significantly higher, for boys and girls; Specifically, the median length-, weight-, head circumference-, BMI-for-age, and weight-for-length was on average 0.9 (range 0.2-1.3) cm, 0.51 (range 0.09-0.74) kg, 0.17 (range - 0.24 to 0.37) cm, 0.70 (range 0.01 to 0.92) kg/m2, and 0.43 (range 0.01 to 1.07) kg higher in Chinese boys, and 1.3 (range 0.5-1.9) cm, 0.73 (range 0.10-0.91) kg, 0.45 (range 0.15-0.62) cm, 0.7 (range 0.0 to 1.0) kg/m2, and 0.42 (range 0.00 to 0.64) kg greater in Chinese girls, respectively. Compared to the current China cross-sectional growth references (based on data from a decade ago), growth references from this study were also higher, but the difference was less than that between growth references of this study and WHO growth standards. CONCLUSIONS: This recent multicenter prospective birth cohort study examined early growth patterns in China. The new growth curves represent the growth patterns of healthy Chinese infants evaluated longitudinally from 0 to 24 months of age, and provide references for monitoring growth in early life in modern China that are more recent than WHO longitudinal growth standards from other countries and previous cross-sectional growth references for China.

Growth of children in Greenland exceeds the World Health Organization growth charts.

AIM: Previous studies have found high rates of stunted linear growth in Greenlandic children. We measured growth patterns in Greenland and compared them with international growth charts. METHODS: The study cohort comprised 279 healthy children aged 6-10 years in 2012. They participated in two pregnancy and birth cohorts in Greenland and longitudinal growth data as birth was extracted from their medical records. Growth reference ranges were estimated with the lambda-mu-sigma (LMS) method and compared with growth charts from Denmark and the World Health Organization (WHO). RESULTS: The children's mean length, weight and head circumference were significantly larger than the WHO growth charts (p < 0.001). We found that 21-28% of the children aged zero to one years exceeded the WHO growth chart for length by more than two standard deviations. For weight and head circumference, 9-16% of the children aged 0-10 years and 9-11% of the children from zero to two years exceeded the WHO charts by more than two standard deviations. The Danish references were exceeded to a lesser degree. CONCLUSION: This study showed that the growth of Greenlandic children up to 10 years was no longer stunted. Major determining factors suggested are genetic admixture, maternal overweight, changes in nutrition and improved health.

Differences in growth of Canadian children compared to the WHO 2006 Child Growth Standards.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate if there are departures from the WHO Child Growth Standards (WHO-CGS) in postnatal growth of healthy 'Canadian' children in Ontario up to age 2 years, including by infant feeding and ethnicity. METHODS: We included data on 9964 healthy, singleton children born in Ontario, Canada. Smoothed weight, length and body mass index (BMI) percentile curves were generated using quantile regression for the Canadian cohort from birth to age 2 years. Differences in percentile values were calculated comparing Canadian children vs. the WHO-CGS. RESULTS: Canadian children under age 2 years were longer than the WHO-CGS at the 10th (0.8 cm), 50th (1.3 cm) and 90th (1.9 cm) percentiles. Canadian children incrementally surpassed the WHO-CGS in weight after age 6 months, and in BMI after 9 months. By age 2 years, the 50th percentile weight of Canadian males was 823 g (95% confidence interval (CI) 680, 965) higher than the WHO-CGS 50th percentile. Weight differences were seen regardless of feeding practice, and were greatest among children of mothers born in Canada and Europe/Western nations, and least for those of East Asian/Pacific or South Asian heritage. Among Canadian breastfed males, 18% (95% CI 16, 19) of newborns and 26% (95% CI 20, 33) toddlers aged 2 years were classified by WHO-CGS as weighing >90th percentile - much higher than the expected rate of 10%. Similarities were seen for differences in BMI. CONCLUSIONS: Healthy Canadian infants/toddlers are longer and heavier than the WHO-CGS norms. Explanations for these discrepancies require further elucidation.