Cited by 146Child Welfare and AdoptionChild Nutrition and Water AccessInfant Development and Preterm Care

Growth and associations between auxology, caregiving environment, and cognition in socially deprived Romanian children randomized to foster vs ongoing institutional care

Open access
Johnson, Dana E., Guthrie, Donald, Smyke, Anna T., Koga, Sebastian F., Fox, Nathan A., Zeanah, Charles H., Nelson, Charles A.·2010·Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine effects of improved nurturing compared with institutional care on physical growth and to investigate the association between growth and cognitive development. DESIGN: A randomized controlled trial beginning in infants (mean age, 21.0 months; range, 5-32 months), with follow-up at 30, 42, and 54 months of age. SETTING: Institutionalized and community children in Bucharest, Romania. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred thirty-six healthy institutionalized children from 6 orphanages and 72 typically developing, never-institutionalized children. INTERVENTION: Institutionalized children were randomly assigned to receive foster care or institutional care as usual. OUTCOME MEASURES: Auxology and measures of intelligence over time. RESULTS: Growth in institutionalized children was compromised, particularly in infants weighing less than 2500 g at birth. Mean height and weight, though not head size, increased to near normal within 12 months in foster care. Significant independent predictors for greater catch-up in height and weight included age younger than 12 months at randomization, lower baseline z scores, and higher caregiving quality, particularly caregiver sensitivity and positive regard. Baseline developmental quotient, birth weight, and height catch-up were significant independent predictors of cognitive abilities at follow-up. Each incremental increase of 1 in standardized height scores between baseline and 42 months was associated with a mean increase of 12.6 points (SD, 4.7 points) in verbal IQ (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Foster care had a significant effect on growth, particularly with early placement and high-quality care. Growth and IQ in low-birth-weight children are particularly vulnerable to social deprivation. Catch-up growth in height under more nurturing conditions is a useful indicator of caregiving quality and cognitive improvement.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archpediatrics.2010.56

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In a follow-up study extending to 54 months, only those in the FCG showed substantial growth in both height and weight, and all FCG participants were within the normal range of growth trajectories 12 months after randomization.

    “In a follow-up study extending to 54 months, only those in the FCG showed substantial growth in both height and weight, and all FCG participants were within the normal range of growth trajectories 12 months after randomization (Johnson et al., 2010).”

    From Long-term cardiometabolic effects of early institutionalization and foster care: Evidence from the Bucharest Early Intervention Project (2026) · cites this paper as Johnson et al., 2010

    The Results (Post-Randomization Growth) report substantial gains in height and weight in the foster-care group (FCG), but also a small improvement in weight in the care-as-usual group. At 12 months, all FCG children were in the normal range for height, but only 90% were in the normal range for weight. The paper reports cognitive outcomes at 54 months; its growth analysis extends to 42 months of age, not 54 months. (LLM, conf=0.91)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Foster care intervention was associated with moderate to strong improvements in physical growth (height, weight, BMI).

    “Moderate to strong improvements in physical growth; moderate improvements in stress responses”

    From Resilience following severe early life neglect: A review of longitudinal evidence from the Bucharest Early Intervention Project (2026) · cites this paper as Johnson et al., 2010

    The Post-Randomization Growth results report significant improvements in height and weight z-scores in the foster-care group, while children receiving ongoing institutional care showed no improvement. The Methods list weight-for-height, not BMI, as the third growth measure; the claim’s specific attribution of BMI improvement is therefore unsupported. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Foster care placement before 24 months of age has been associated with better child and adolescent outcomes (e.g., cognition, brain function, attachment, physical growth) compared to placement after 24 months of age.

    “Foster care placement before 24 months of age has been associated with better child and adolescent outcomes (e.g., cognition, brain function, attachment, physical growth) compared to placement after 24 months of age (Johnson et al., 2010;Nelson et al., 2007;Smyke et al., 2010;Vanderwert et al., 2016).”

    From Resilience following severe early life neglect: A review of longitudinal evidence from the Bucharest Early Intervention Project (2026) · cites this paper as Johnson et al., 2010

    The Discussion reports a sensitive period before 24 months for cognitive recovery, attachment behavior, and EEG improvement, while this study finds an earlier threshold—before 12 months—for growth recovery. The paper reports outcomes in young children, not adolescents, so it does not support the claim's adolescent scope. (LLM, conf=0.89)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Early institutionalization is most strongly linked to delayed physical growth, smaller brains, and lower scores on cognition tests.

    “Decades of research have shown that early institutionalization is most strongly linked to delayed physical growth (e.g., height and weight) (Johnson et al., 2010), smaller brains (Nelson et al., 2007;Sheridan et al., 2012), and lower scores on cognition tests (Bos et al., 2009;Smyke et al., 2007;Van IJzendoorn et al., 2020).”
  • Once in a family, previously institutionalized children show steep improvements across domains, including weight, head circumference, and cognitive testing during childhood and adolescence.

    “Once in a family, children have demonstrated steep improvements across domains (Johnson, et al., 2010; Van Ijzendoorn, Bakermans-Kranenburg, & Juffer, 2007), including weight and head circumference (Rutter & O’Connor, 2004), as well as showing evidence during childhood and adolescence of improvement on cognitive testing (Beckett, et al., 2006; Fox, Almas, Degnan, Nelson, & Zeanah, 2011; van den D”

    From Risk and developmental heterogeneity in previously institutionalized children (2012) · cites this paper as Johnson, et al., 2010

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 62 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [32]Zeanah CH Egger HL Smyke AT Institutional rearing and psychiatric disorders in Romanian preschool children Am J Psychiatry 2009 166 7 777 785 19487394

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Johnson, D. E., Guthrie, D., Smyke, A. T., Koga, S. F., Fox, N. A., Zeanah, C. H., & Nelson, C. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Minnesota (US)
  • Tulane University (US)
Venue
Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine
Published
2010-06-01
Volume
164
Issue
6
Pages
507-16
ISSN
1072-4710 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2153358224
Cited by
145
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 12
FWCI
27.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH091363)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Child Welfare and Adoption
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Child Nutrition and Water Access
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Infant Development and Preterm Care
Keywords
foster care, institutional care, orphans, social deprivation, child growth, catch-up growth, height, weight, head circumference, cognitive development, intelligence quotient, verbal IQ, caregiver sensitivity, caregiving quality, low birth weight
MeSH terms
Anthropometry, Child, Institutionalized, Child, Preschool, Cognition, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Foster Home Care, Growth Disorders, Humans, Infant, Male, Romania, Social Isolation, Caregivers, Orphanages

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review