Infant Growth Modelling and Assessment of Growth

  • Ken J. Beath


Assessment of factors influencing infant growth is best performed using a modelling approach; however this is difficult due to the high initial rate of growth and wide variability. The aim is to obtain a model which produces a good fit to the data with a minimum number of parameters. A number of parametric models have been used, motivated mainly by ability to fit data, rather than biological considerations. Biologically it is unlikely that growth can be modelled by a simple function, so a semi-parametric model appears more appropriate and may produce more interpretable parameters. A semi-parametric model is based around a flexible shape which is common to all subjects, combined with parameters that transform the curve for individual subjects, with only few models of this type available. When fitting models, a mixed effects model approach is preferred, rather than fitting subjects individually. Covariates may be included in the models as either time-independent or time-dependent covariates, but interpretation may be difficult for time-dependent covariates. The models are compared using data on weight and length in the first 2 years of life. A semi-parametric model, the shape invariant model, had similar fit to the Jenss–Bayley model, but with more easily interpretable parameters. A quartic (fourth degree) polynomial did have a superior fit but at the expense of a larger number of parameters, and possible overfitting.


Quadratic Polynomial Multivariate Normal Distribution Gompertz Model Typical Subject Infant Growth 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



The investigators and research staff of CAPS for the supply of data used in the example.


  1. Barker DJP. Fetal origins of coronary heart-disease. BMJ. 1995;311:171–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beath KJ. Infant growth modeling using a shape invariant model with random effects. Stat Med. 2007;26:2547–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berkey CS. Comparison of two longitudinal growth models for preschool children. Biometrics. 1982;38:221–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berkey CS, Laird NM. Nonlinear growth curve analysis: estimating the population parameters. Ann Hum Biol. 1986;13:111–28.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berkey CS, Reed RB. A model for describing normal and abnormal growth in early childhood. Hum Biol. 1987;59:973–87.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bialik O, Peritz E, Arnon A. Weight growth in infancy: a regression analysis. Hum Biol. 1973;45:81–93.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Bock RD, du Toit SHC. Parameter estimation in the context of non-linear longitudinal growth models. In: Hauspie RC, Cameron N, Molinari L, editors. Methods in human growth research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2004, pp. 234–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bock RD, Thissen D. Statistical problems of fitting curves for individual growth in stature. In: Johnston FE, Roche AF, Susanne C, editors. Human physical growth and maturation. New York: Plenum Press; 1980, pp. 265–90.Google Scholar
  9. Brown H, Prescott R. Applied mixed models in medicine. London: Wiley; 2007.Google Scholar
  10. Cole TJ. Relating growth rate to environmental factors-methodological problems in the study of growth–infection interaction. Acta Paediatr Scand Suppl. 1989;350:14–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Count EW. Growth patterns of the human physique: an approach to kinetic anthropometry. Hum Biol. 1943;15:1–32.Google Scholar
  12. de Stavola BL, Nitsch D, dos Santos Silva I, McCormack V, Hardy R, Mann V, Cole TJ, Morton S, Leon DA. Statistical issues in life course epidemiology. Am J Epidemiol. 2006;163:84–96.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Guo S, Roche AF, Fomon SJ, Nelson SE, Chumlea WC, Rogers RR, Baumgartner RN, Ziegler EE, Siervogel RM. Reference data on gains in weight and length during the first two years of life. J Pediatr. 1991;119:355–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jenss RM, Bayley N. A mathematical method for studying the growth of a child. Hum Biol. 1937;9:556–63.Google Scholar
  15. Karlberg J. On the modelling of human growth. Stat Med. 1987;6:185–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kouchi M, Mukherjee D, Roche AF. Curve fitting for growth in weight during infancy with relationships to adult status, and familial associations of the estimated parameters. Hum Biol. 1985;57:245–65.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Laird AK. Evolution of the human growth curve. Growth 1967;31:345–55.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Lampl M. Evidence of saltatory growth in infancy. Am J Hum Biol. 1993;5:641–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mihrshahi S, Peat JK, Webb K, Tovey RE, Marks GB, Mellis CM, Leeder SR. The Childhood Asthma Prevention Study (CAPS): design and research protocol of a randomized trial for the primary prevention of asthma. The Childhood Asthma Prevention Study (CAPS): design and research protocol of a randomized trial for the primary prevention of asthma. Control Clin Trials 2001;22:333–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Naumova EN, Must A, Laird NM. Tutorial in biostatistics: evaluating the impact of ‘critical periods’ in longitudinal studies of growth using piecewise mixed effects models. Int J Epidemiol. 2001;30:1332–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ong KKL, Preece MA, Emmett PM, Ahmed ML, Dunger DB. Size at birth and early childhood growth in relation to maternal smoking, parity and infant breast-feeding: longitudinal birth cohort study and analysis. Pediatr Res. 2002;52:863–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Peerson JM, Heinig MJ, Nommsen LA, Lonnerdal B, Dewey KG. Use of growth models to describe patterns of length, weight, and head circumference among breast-fed and formula-fed infants: the DARLING study. Hum Biol. 1993;65:611–26.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Pinheiro JC, Bates DM. Mixed-effects models in S and S-plus. New York: Springer; 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rao CR. Use of growth models to describe patterns of length, weight, and head circumference among breast-fed and formula-fed infants: the DARLING study. Biometrics. 1958;14:1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Stützle W, Gasser T, Molinari L, Largo R, Prader A, Huber P. Shape-invariant modelling of human growth. Ann Hum Biol. 1980;7:507–28.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Vandenberg SG, Falkner F. Hereditary factors in human growth. Hum Biol. 1965;37:357–65.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Waterlow JC, Buzina R, Keller W, Lane JM, Nichaman MZ, Tanner JM. The presentation and use of height and weight data for comparing the nutritional status of groups of children under the age of 10 years. Bull World Health Organ. 1977;55:489–98.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. WHO Multicentre Growth Reference Study Group. WHO child growth standards based on length/height, weight and age. Acta Paediatr Suppl. 2006;450:76–85.Google Scholar
  29. Wingerd J. The relation of growth from birth to 2 years to sex, parental size and other factors, using Rao’s method of the transformed time scale. Hum Biol. 1970;42:105–31.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Wishart J. Growth-rate determinations in nutrition studies with the bacon pig and their analysis. Biometrika. 1938;30:16–28.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of StatisticsMacquarie UniversitySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations