BACKGROUND/AIMS: The objective of our study was to compare the fit of four growth models for weight and height in contemporary US children between birth and 9 years. METHODS: In Project Viva, we collected weight and height growth data between birth and 9 years. We compared the Jenss model, the adapted Jenss model that adds a quadratic term, and the Reed 1st and 2nd order models. We used the log likelihood ratio test to compare nested models and the Akaike (AIC)/Bayesian information criterion (BIC) to compare nonnested models. RESULTS: For weight and height, the adapted Jenss model had a better fit than the Jenss model (for weight: p < 0.0001), and the Reed 2nd order model had a better fit than the Reed 1st order model (for weight: p < 0.0001). Compared with the Reed 2nd order model, the adapted Jenss model had a better fit for both weight (adapted Jenss vs. Reed 2nd order, AIC: 66,974 vs. 82,791, BIC: 67,066 vs. 82,883) and height (adapted Jenss vs. Reed 2nd order, AIC: 87,108 vs. 87,612, BIC: 87,196 vs. 87,700). CONCLUSIONS: In this pre-birth study of children aged 0-9 years, for both weight and height the adapted Jenss model presented the best fit of all four tested models.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Regnault et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: