↓ Skip to main content

Reported shoes size during GH therapy: is foot overgrowth a myth or reality?

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Endocrinology and Metabolism, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Reported shoes size during GH therapy: is foot overgrowth a myth or reality?
Published in
Archives of Endocrinology and Metabolism, July 2015
DOI 10.1590/2359-3997000000062
Pubmed ID
Authors

Débora C. F. Lago, Cláudia A. Coutinho, Cristiane Kochi, Carlos A. Longui

Abstract

Objectives To describe population reference values for shoes size, and to identify possible disproportional foot growth during GH therapy. Materials and methods Construction of percentile chart based on 3,651 controls (male: 1,838; female: 1,813). The GH treated group included 13 children with idiopathic short stature (ISS) and 50 children with normal height, but with height prediction below their target height; male: 26 and female: 37 mean ± SD age 13.3 ± 1.9 and 12.9 ± 1.5 years, respectively. GH (0.05 mg/kg/day) was used for 3.2 ± 1.6 years, ranging from 1.0-10.3 years. Height expressed as SDS, target height (TH) SDS, self-reported shoes size and target shoes size (TSS) SDS were recorded. Results Reference values were established showed as a foot SDS calculator available online at www.clinicalcaselearning.com/v2. Definitive shoes size was attained in controls at mean age of 13y in girls and 14y in boys (average values 37 and 40, respectively). In the study group, shoes size was -0.15 ± 0.9 and -0.02 ± 1.3 SDS, with target feet of 0.08 ± 0.8 and -0.27 ± 0.7 SDS in males and females, respectively. There was a significant positive correlation between shoes size and familial TSS, between shoes size and height and between TSS and TH. There was no correlation between duration of GH treatment and shoes size. Our data suggest that during long-term treatment with GH, patients maintain proportional growth in shoes size and height, and the expected correlation with the familial target. Conclusions We conclude that there is no excessive increase in the size of foot as estimated by the size of shoes in individuals under long term GH therapy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 33%
Student > Master 3 20%
Other 2 13%
Professor 1 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 1 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 5 33%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 20%
Mathematics 1 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 7%
Linguistics 1 7%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 2 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 May 2016.
All research outputs
#20,655,488
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Endocrinology and Metabolism
#528
of 800 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#201,034
of 274,966 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Endocrinology and Metabolism
#8
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 800 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 274,966 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.