芝加哥婴儿死亡研究中婴儿猝死综合症病例和其他婴儿死亡病例尸检时的器官重量和身长人体测量数据。

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q1 ANTHROPOLOGY American Journal of Human Biology Pub Date : 2024-07-03 DOI:10.1002/ajhb.24126
Josyf C. Mychaleckyj, Cornelius Normeshie, Keith L. Keene, Fern R. Hauck
{"title":"芝加哥婴儿死亡研究中婴儿猝死综合症病例和其他婴儿死亡病例尸检时的器官重量和身长人体测量数据。","authors":"Josyf C. Mychaleckyj,&nbsp;Cornelius Normeshie,&nbsp;Keith L. Keene,&nbsp;Fern R. Hauck","doi":"10.1002/ajhb.24126","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Organ weights are a possible diagnostic or pathophysiological clue to distinguishing sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) cases from other infant deaths but suffer from major confounding. Using autopsy data from the Chicago Infant Mortality Study, a majority African-American case–control study of deceased infants under 1 year conducted 1993–96, we assessed differences in the weights of brain, thymus, kidneys, lungs, liver, spleen, total body, and four length anthropometry measures in SIDS-diagnosed infants compared to controls. Using exact and coarsened matching, we ran Bayesian linear models with these anthropometry outcomes and repeated the analyses substituting the corresponding fitted allometrically-scaled organ weight indices to account for body size. After detailed analysis and adjustment for potential confounders, we found that matched SIDS infants were generally bigger than controls, with higher mean brain, liver, spleen, thymus, lung, and total body weights, and higher mean head and chest circumference, crown-heel, crown-rump lengths. SIDS infants also had higher mean thymus, liver, spleen, lung and total body weight indices. The association with thymus weight was proportionately greater in magnitude than any other outcome measure and independent of body size. The results of these more detailed analyses are consistent with recent findings from other studies with differing racial compositions, and substantially confirm the primary organ sites for more detailed mechanistic research into the biological dysregulation contributing to underlying pathophysiology of SIDS.</p>","PeriodicalId":50809,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Human Biology","volume":"36 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ajhb.24126","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Organ weights and length anthropometry measures at autopsy for sudden infant death syndrome cases and other infant deaths in the Chicago infant mortality study\",\"authors\":\"Josyf C. Mychaleckyj,&nbsp;Cornelius Normeshie,&nbsp;Keith L. Keene,&nbsp;Fern R. Hauck\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ajhb.24126\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Organ weights are a possible diagnostic or pathophysiological clue to distinguishing sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) cases from other infant deaths but suffer from major confounding. Using autopsy data from the Chicago Infant Mortality Study, a majority African-American case–control study of deceased infants under 1 year conducted 1993–96, we assessed differences in the weights of brain, thymus, kidneys, lungs, liver, spleen, total body, and four length anthropometry measures in SIDS-diagnosed infants compared to controls. Using exact and coarsened matching, we ran Bayesian linear models with these anthropometry outcomes and repeated the analyses substituting the corresponding fitted allometrically-scaled organ weight indices to account for body size. After detailed analysis and adjustment for potential confounders, we found that matched SIDS infants were generally bigger than controls, with higher mean brain, liver, spleen, thymus, lung, and total body weights, and higher mean head and chest circumference, crown-heel, crown-rump lengths. SIDS infants also had higher mean thymus, liver, spleen, lung and total body weight indices. The association with thymus weight was proportionately greater in magnitude than any other outcome measure and independent of body size. The results of these more detailed analyses are consistent with recent findings from other studies with differing racial compositions, and substantially confirm the primary organ sites for more detailed mechanistic research into the biological dysregulation contributing to underlying pathophysiology of SIDS.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50809,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Human Biology\",\"volume\":\"36 10\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ajhb.24126\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Human Biology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajhb.24126\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Human Biology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajhb.24126","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

器官重量可能是区分婴儿猝死综合症(SIDS)和其他婴儿死亡病例的诊断或病理生理学线索,但存在很大的混淆性。我们利用芝加哥婴儿死亡率研究(Chicago Infant Mortality Study)的尸检数据,评估了被诊断为婴儿猝死综合症的婴儿与对照组相比,脑、胸腺、肾脏、肺、肝脏、脾脏、全身以及四种身长人体测量指标的重量差异。通过精确匹配和粗匹配,我们利用这些人体测量结果运行了贝叶斯线性模型,并用相应的拟合同比例器官重量指数替代体型来重复分析。经过详细分析和对潜在混杂因素的调整,我们发现匹配的婴儿猝死综合症患儿普遍比对照组大,平均脑重、肝重、脾重、胸腺重、肺重和总体重较高,平均头围、胸围、冠-跟、冠-臀长较高。婴儿猝死综合症患儿的胸腺、肝脏、脾脏、肺和全身的平均体重指数也较高。与胸腺重量的关系在比例上大于其他任何结果指标,并且与体型无关。这些更详细的分析结果与最近其他不同种族组成的研究结果一致,并大大确认了主要器官部位,以便对导致婴儿猝死综合症潜在病理生理学的生物失调进行更详细的机理研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Organ weights and length anthropometry measures at autopsy for sudden infant death syndrome cases and other infant deaths in the Chicago infant mortality study

Organ weights are a possible diagnostic or pathophysiological clue to distinguishing sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) cases from other infant deaths but suffer from major confounding. Using autopsy data from the Chicago Infant Mortality Study, a majority African-American case–control study of deceased infants under 1 year conducted 1993–96, we assessed differences in the weights of brain, thymus, kidneys, lungs, liver, spleen, total body, and four length anthropometry measures in SIDS-diagnosed infants compared to controls. Using exact and coarsened matching, we ran Bayesian linear models with these anthropometry outcomes and repeated the analyses substituting the corresponding fitted allometrically-scaled organ weight indices to account for body size. After detailed analysis and adjustment for potential confounders, we found that matched SIDS infants were generally bigger than controls, with higher mean brain, liver, spleen, thymus, lung, and total body weights, and higher mean head and chest circumference, crown-heel, crown-rump lengths. SIDS infants also had higher mean thymus, liver, spleen, lung and total body weight indices. The association with thymus weight was proportionately greater in magnitude than any other outcome measure and independent of body size. The results of these more detailed analyses are consistent with recent findings from other studies with differing racial compositions, and substantially confirm the primary organ sites for more detailed mechanistic research into the biological dysregulation contributing to underlying pathophysiology of SIDS.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
13.80%
发文量
124
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Human Biology is the Official Journal of the Human Biology Association. The American Journal of Human Biology is a bimonthly, peer-reviewed, internationally circulated journal that publishes reports of original research, theoretical articles and timely reviews, and brief communications in the interdisciplinary field of human biology. As the official journal of the Human Biology Association, the Journal also publishes abstracts of research presented at its annual scientific meeting and book reviews relevant to the field. The Journal seeks scholarly manuscripts that address all aspects of human biology, health, and disease, particularly those that stress comparative, developmental, ecological, or evolutionary perspectives. The transdisciplinary areas covered in the Journal include, but are not limited to, epidemiology, genetic variation, population biology and demography, physiology, anatomy, nutrition, growth and aging, physical performance, physical activity and fitness, ecology, and evolution, along with their interactions. The Journal publishes basic, applied, and methodologically oriented research from all areas, including measurement, analytical techniques and strategies, and computer applications in human biology. Like many other biologically oriented disciplines, the field of human biology has undergone considerable growth and diversification in recent years, and the expansion of the aims and scope of the Journal is a reflection of this growth and membership diversification. The Journal is committed to prompt review, and priority publication is given to manuscripts with novel or timely findings, and to manuscripts of unusual interest.
期刊最新文献
Meta-Analysis of the Heritability of Childhood Height From 560 000 Pairs of Relatives Born Between 1929 and 2004. Celebrating 50 Years of the Human Biology Association. Comparison of Sport Type on the Handgrip Strength Change in Young Athletes. Anthropometric Studies of Schoolchildren During the First Decades of the 20th Century in Spain and Argentina. Is Alcohol Consumption Pattern Dependent on Prenatal Sex-Steroids? A Digit Ratio (2D:4D) Study Among University Students.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1