IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0208362.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimisation of children z-score calculation based on new statistical techniques

Author

Listed:
  • Antonio Martinez-Millana
  • Jessie M Hulst
  • Mieke Boon
  • Peter Witters
  • Carlos Fernandez-Llatas
  • Ines Asseiceira
  • Joaquin Calvo-Lerma
  • Ignacio Basagoiti
  • Vicente Traver
  • Kris De Boeck
  • Carmen Ribes-Koninckx

Abstract

Background: Expressing anthropometric parameters (height, weight, BMI) as z-score is a key principle in the clinical assessment of children and adolescents. The Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) growth charts and the CDC-LMS method for z-score calculation are widely used to assess growth and nutritional status, though they can be imprecise in some percentiles. Objective: To improve the accuracy of z-score calculation by revising the statistical method using the original data used to develop current z-score calculators. Design: A Gaussian Process Regressions (GPR) was designed and internally validated. Z-scores for weight-for-age (WFA), height-for-age (HFA) and BMI-for-age (BMIFA) were compared with WHO and CDC-LMS methods in 1) standard z-score cut-off points, 2) simulated population of 3000 children and 3) real observations 212 children aged 2 to 18 yo. Results: GPR yielded more accurate calculation of z-scores for standard cut-off points (p

Suggested Citation

  • Antonio Martinez-Millana & Jessie M Hulst & Mieke Boon & Peter Witters & Carlos Fernandez-Llatas & Ines Asseiceira & Joaquin Calvo-Lerma & Ignacio Basagoiti & Vicente Traver & Kris De Boeck & Carmen R, 2018. "Optimisation of children z-score calculation based on new statistical techniques," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-13, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0208362
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0208362
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0208362
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0208362&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0208362?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Qianling Tian & Xiao Gao & Tingting Sha & Qiong He & Gang Cheng & Xialing Wu & Fan Yang & Xihong Wu & Cai Tang & Qunhui Xie & Yan Yan, 2019. "Differences between WHO Growth Standards and China Growth Standards in Assessing the Nutritional Status of Children Aged 0–36 Months Old," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(1), pages 1-13, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0208362. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.