4.1 Article

Evaluating health risk using a continuous metabolic syndrome score in obese children

Journal

JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Volume 29, Issue 4, Pages 451-458

Publisher

WALTER DE GRUYTER GMBH
DOI: 10.1515/jpem-2015-0271

Keywords

acanthosis nigricans; childhood obesity; continuous metabolic syndrome score; metabolic risk; metabolic syndrome

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The metabolic syndrome (MS) in pediatrics is controversial. Rather than a dichotomous scale, a continuous metabolic syndrome score (cMets) has been proposed to evaluate MS. The aim of this study was to evaluate the utility of a cMets score among an ethnically diverse cohort of children with acanthosis nigricans (AN). Methods: A retrospective chart review was used to extract clinical and laboratory information on a cohort of obese children. Criteria for MS components and the cMets score were established using published guidelines. Multiple linear regression evaluated the effect of AN status on MS and cMets. Fisher's exact test compared the race differential on the presence or absence of MS component disorders. Results: MS diagnosis was non-significant when considering AN status (p = 0.554) and ethnicity (p = 0.431). Evaluation of the frequency of component disorders, revealed that Caucasians had significantly higher levels of abnormal triglycerides (TG) (35.1 vs. 10.3%; p < 0.001), whereas African Americans had significantly higher homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) scores (51.3% vs. 22.3%; p < 0.001). cMets was sensitive to identifying metabolic risk among Caucasians with AN, only (p = 0.029). Conclusions: This study found differences in health risk among an obese, ethnically diverse sample of children. cMets is a more sensitive marker of metabolic change compared with MS, especially when AN status and race are considered. cMets may pose an opportunity for the clinician to evaluate the interaction of health risks on the health status of obese children.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available