MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971911829 · doi:10.1080/07315724.2013.848156

Nutritional Status in Sick Children and Adolescents Is Not Accurately Reflected by BMI-SDS

2013· article· en· W1971911829 on OpenAlexaffabout
Gerhard Fusch, Preeya Raja, Nguyễn Quang Dũng, Nadina Karaolis‐Danckert, Ronald D. Barr, Christoph Fusch

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American College of Nutrition · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBody Composition Measurement Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcMaster Children's HospitalMcMaster University
FundersUniversität Greifswald
KeywordsUnderweightOverweightMedicineAnthropometryPercentileBody mass indexPopulationObesityStandard scorePediatricsDemographyInternal medicineEnvironmental healthMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Nutritional status provides helpful information of disease severity and treatment effectiveness. Body mass index standard deviation scores (BMI-SDS) provide an approximation of body composition and thus are frequently used to classify nutritional status of sick children and adolescents. However, the accuracy of estimating body composition in this population using BMI-SDS has not been assessed. Thus, this study aims to evaluate the accuracy of nutritional status classification in sick infants and adolescents using BMI-SDS, upon comparison to classification using percentage body fat (%BF) reference charts. DESIGN: BMI-SDS was calculated from anthropometric measurements and %BF was measured using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) for 393 sick children and adolescents (5 months-18 years). Subjects were classified by nutritional status (underweight, normal weight, overweight, and obese), using 2 methods: (1) BMI-SDS, based on age- and gender-specific percentiles, and (2) %BF reference charts (standard). Linear regression and a correlation analysis were conducted to compare agreement between both methods of nutritional status classification. %BF reference value comparisons were also made between 3 independent sources based on German, Canadian, and American study populations. RESULTS: Correlation between nutritional status classification by BMI-SDS and %BF agreed moderately (r (2) = 0.75, 0.76 in boys and girls, respectively). The misclassification of nutritional status in sick children and adolescents using BMI-SDS was 27% when using German %BF references. Similar rates observed when using Canadian and American %BF references (24% and 23%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Using BMI-SDS to determine nutritional status in a sick population is not considered an appropriate clinical tool for identifying individual underweight or overweight children or adolescents. However, BMI-SDS may be appropriate for longitudinal measurements or for screening purposes in large field studies. When accurate nutritional status classification of a sick patient is needed for clinical purposes, nutritional status will be assessed more accurately using methods that accurately measure %BF, such as DXA.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.769
Threshold uncertainty score0.409

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American College of NutritionSame topicBody Composition Measurement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207