Final Height in Children with Idiopathic Growth Hormone Deficiency Treated with a Fixed Dose of Recombinant Growth Hormone
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is no consensus regarding the optimal dosing of recombinant human growth hormone (rhGH) for children with growth hormone deficiency (GHD). Our objective was to evaluate the final adult height (FAH) in children with idiopathic GHD treated with a fixed rhGH dose of 0.18 mg/kg/week. We reviewed all charts of patients with idiopathic GHD treated with rhGH since 1985 who reached FAH. Ninety-six patients were treated for an average of 5.4 years. The mean age was 11.9 years, the mean height -2.87 standard deviation score (SDS) and the mean FAH was -1.04 SDS. Females had a lower predicted adult height than males at the initiation of therapy (-2.0 vs. -1.01 SDS; p = 0.0087) but a higher FAH - predicted adult height (1.08 vs. 0.04 SDS; p = 0.0026). In multiple regression analysis, the FAH SDS was positively related to the midparental height SDS, the height SDS at GH initiation and growth velocity during the first year of therapy, and negatively correlated with peak GH and bone age at initiation (r(2) = 0.51; p < 0.005). Treatment of children with idiopathic GHD with a fixed dose of 0.18 mg/kg/week rhGH is sufficient to reach FAH within 2 SDS of the normal population range (84%) with an average FAH within -0.5 SDS of midparental height.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it