The Interaction between Prenatal and Socioeconomic Effects on Growth and Development in Childhood
It has long been known that socioeconomic status (SES) has considerable influence on both size and growth. In the days of the Czars and the Emperors, children whose fathers held menial occupations were systematically smaller than those of the professional class (cf Krogman, 1941). More than 80 years later, in the Ten-State Nutrition Survey of the United States, low per-capita income and low income-to-needs ratios were still associated with smaller size and with delayed ossification timing (Garn and Clark, 1975). It can also be shown that poverty is more growth-depressing for males than for females, even in intrauterine life (Garn, Shaw and McCabe, 1977a).
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Bayley, N., 1969, “Bayley scales of infant development”. The Psychological Corporation, New York.Google Scholar
- Garn, S.A., Shaw, H.A. and McCabe, K.D., 1977b, Effects of Socioeconomic status and race on weight-defined and gestational prematurity inthe United States, in: The Epidemiology of Prematurity, D.W. Reed and F.J., Stanley, eds., Urban and Scharzenberg, Baltimore.Google Scholar
- Krogman, W.M., 1941, Growth of Man, in: Tabulae Biologicae X X, W. Junk, The Hague.Google Scholar