Responses

Download PDFPDF

Is routine growth monitoring effective? A systematic review of trials
Free
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Re: Growth monitoring
    Dear Editor

    Michael Perkin[1] is absolutely right. The initial protocol defined routine growth monitoring in the setting familiar to us in poorer countries as three monthly measurements. As we found so few studies in our first search, we extended the inclusion criteria to any trial where growth is routinely monitored twice or more in any two year period in children aged 0-5 years, but neglected to change the wording in t...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    Growth monitoring
    Dear Editor

    Garner, Panpanich and Logan (Arch Dis Child 2000;82:197-201) presented a much needed review of growth monitoring. This is a component of primary health care on which so much finance and health workers' time has and is being expended. No doubt this review will stimulate more necessary trials.

    However, they did not touch on one important aspect of growth monitoring, that is whether health work...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    Systematic review had no relevance to routine monitoring as it is undertaken in the UK

    Dear Editor

    As someone who is in the throes of writing a chapter on growth monitoring in primary care for the Royal College of General Practitioners I read Garner et al's article(1) as well as their original Cochrane review (2) with interest. Both Professor Davies commentary and Professor Marcovitch’s precis in "Archives this month" discuss the findings in relation to growth monitoring in the United Kingdom. Un...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.