Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2025 Apr 15;20(4):e0321798. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0321798

Epidemiology of disorders associated with tall stature in childhood: A 20-year birth cohort study

Samuli Harju 1,2,*, Antti Saari 1,2, Reijo Sund 1, Ulla Sankilampi 1,2
Editor: Heather Macdonald3
PMCID: PMC11999151  PMID: 40233073

Abstract

Many primary and secondary disorders in childhood may cause tall stature (height of +2 standard deviations above the mean height for age and sex). Growth-monitoring programs are aimed at early detection of such disorders to avoid permanent health consequences and support children’s wellbeing. However, age- and sex-specific data on the incidence of disorders associated with tall stature are scarce. This retrospective population-based cohort study aims to specify the epidemiological data that are needed to develop better diagnostic practices. The study population included 1 144 503 children (51% boys) born in Finland between 1998 and 2017 with 16.5 million register notifications including medical diagnoses. The first occurrences of several primary or secondary disorders associated with tall stature were identified from multiple registers. The age- and sex-specific cumulative incidences (CMIs) from birth until 18 years of age and the median age at diagnosis were determined. A total of 1641 children (0.14% of the whole birth cohort, 44% boys) had a primary or secondary disorder associated with tall stature. Klinefelter syndrome (47,XXY karyotype) was the most common primary disorder (median age at diagnosis: 8.4 years, CMI at 18 years: 1/2146 boys). Marfan syndrome (5.9 years, 1/4307 girls; 7.1 years, 1/5202 boys) and congenital overgrowth syndromes (1.7 years, 1/4717 girls; 1.8 years; 1/4925 boys) did not have a predilection for either sex. Secondary conditions such as central precocious puberty (1/894 girls at 8 years, and 1/4856 boys at 9 years) and hyperthyroidism (15.1 years, 1/936 girls; 14.4 years, 1/5675 boys) were more common among girls. Disorders associated with tall stature are rare and are frequently underdiagnosed in childhood. We suggest that during early childhood, the focus of growth screening should be particularly on Marfan syndrome and congenital overgrowth syndromes, with the addition of Klinefelter syndrome and central precocious puberty thereafter.

Introduction

Tall stature is usually defined as a height more than +2 standard deviations (SDs) above the mean height for age and sex or height more than +2 SDs above the mid-parental target height (+1.6 SDs according to another definition) [1,2]. Excessive tallness in childhood is caused by several primary (congenital) and secondary (acquired) conditions, or if these are excluded, it is considered a normal variant of unknown cause (idiopathic) [3,4].

Primary growth disorders that often cause tall stature among other features include several clinically defined syndromes [3,4]. Examples of those include sex chromosome aneuploids, including 47,XXY or Klinefelter syndrome (KS), 47,XYY syndrome (XYY), and 47,XXX syndrome (triple X), which all lead to tall stature. They are estimated to be relatively common but highly underdiagnosed conditions with the maximum incidences of 1 per 500 in KS, 1 per 851 in XYY, and 1 per 1000 in triple X [59]. Growth acceleration in the prepubertal period is observed in Fragile X syndrome (FXS) [10,11]. Several monogenic syndromes, most importantly Marfan syndrome (MFS), are also associated with tall stature. Congenital overgrowth syndromes (COSs) such as Sotos and Beckwith–Wiedemann syndromes are rare and characterised by early overgrowth in addition to many other distinct features [12,13]. Accelerated growth is also frequently observed at the diagnosis of congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH), but it eventually leads to reduced adult height caused by accelerated bone maturation if left untreated [4,14].

Acquired (secondary) causes for pathological growth acceleration and tall stature in childhood comprise a few endocrinological conditions [3]. Growth hormone overproduction (pituitary gigantism) is a classical cause of tall stature, although it is extremely rare [15]. Common endocrine conditions such as hyperthyroidism are often associated with mild growth acceleration [4]. Central precocious puberty (CPP) is a frequent cause of growth acceleration and tall stature compared to healthy peers. It begins before age 8 in girls and age 9 in boys and requires prompt identification, investigations, and possibly management to prevent the early termination of linear growth and possibly short adult height [16].

Unlike short stature and its aetiology, which we have recently investigated in this same cohort, epidemiological data on conditions causing tall stature or growth acceleration are scarce [17,18]. Furthermore, previous studies have mostly investigated single disorders in smaller or restricted study populations. The present study aimed to elucidate the age- and sex-specific epidemiology of several primary and secondary disorders causing tall stature in a large population-based 20-year birth cohort. Such data are needed to develop evidence-based growth-screening programs and better diagnostic practices of disorders associated with tall stature in paediatric health care worldwide. Timely diagnosis of underlying conditions is important to prevent permanent effects on physical health and adult height and to support children’s development.

Materials and methods

Study design, setting, and participants

This retrospective population-based 20-year birth cohort study examined 1 151 821 children born in Finland between 1998 and 2017 according to the Medical Birth Register (MBR), which is maintained by the Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare (THL) [19]. Over 92% of the children in the study population were of Finnish background [20]. The same study cohort and methods were used in our earlier study which investigated the epidemiology of disorders associated with short stature in children [17]. We combined data from four national health registers: MBR, the Care Register of Health Care (CRHC), the Statistics on Deaths (n = 4414), and the Purchases and Reimbursements for Prescription Medicines [2123]. Subjects with incorrect personal ID codes or incomplete register notifications (n = 7318) were excluded. The final study population consisted of 1 144 503 children (51% boys) with 16.5 million care notifications including medical diagnoses. The first occurrences of the diagnoses for disorders associated with tall stature were identified from the MBR and CRHC. Data on linear growth measurements were not available.

The following primary or secondary disorders associated with tall stature were selected for analyses: KS (boys; ICD-10 codes Q98.0, Q98.1, Q98.4), XYY (boys; Q98.5), triple X (girls; Q97.0), FXS (Q99.2), MFS (Q87.4), COS (Beckwith–Wiedemann Q87.30, Sotos Q87.31, other Q87.38), CAH (E25.00, E25.01), hyperthyroidism (E05.0–E05.2), and CPP (E22.80 and E30.1). Idiopathic stall stature (ITS; familial or constitutional and non-familial: E34.40) was also included. There were only a few cases of pituitary gigantism (n = 4) and homocystinuria (n = 11) among the study population, which were not included.

Statistical methods

The age- and sex-specific cumulative incidence (CMI, and 95% confidence interval) of the disorders was estimated from birth (diagnoses during the first week of life) until the maximum of 18 years of age, and the median age at diagnosis with interquartile range (IQR, from the 25th to 75th percentiles) was determined. Estimation was conducted using the cumulative incidence function (CIF) according to the Aalen-Johansen estimator, which estimates the cumulative probability of occurrence of an event of interest (the first diagnosis) in the presence of competing events [24]. Death before the end of the follow-up time was considered a competing risk, and follow-up was censored on the final day of 2017. We also checked the purchases of medications used regularly for KS (testosterone, ATC code G03BA03), CPP (leuprorelin, L02AE02), and hyperthyroidism (antithyroid preparations, H03B) to get a crude estimate of the number of children using the specific medication. Data were processed in SPSS version 27, and R statistical software version 4.3.2 (R Foundation) was used to calculate CIFs.

Research ethics

Data were accessed for research purposes on 9 October 2018. After the initial exclusion process, data were pseudonymised, and thereafter only the research leader had access to information that could identify individual participants. There was no contact between the researchers and the study population. According to Finnish legislation, consent was not needed. The study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Northern Savo Hospital District, and permissions to use data were obtained from the maintainers of the data (THL, Statistics Finland, and Social Insurance Institution).

Results

This population-based study cohort examined 11.3 million person-years of follow-up in 1 144 503 children. In total, 1641 children (0.14% of the whole birth cohort, 44% boys) were diagnosed with either a primary (926 children, 65% boys) or secondary (715 children, 17% boys) disorder associated with tall stature before the age of 18 years.

Primary growth disorders

Altogether 167 boys were diagnosed with KS, making it the most common primary tall-stature disorder among boys (Table 1, Fig 1). Of the diagnosed boys, 42 (25%) had at least one purchase of testosterone. 47,XYY syndrome (n = 96 boys) and triple X syndrome (n=68 girls) were more infrequent (Table 1, Fig 1). FXS was diagnosed in 172 children (77% boys) during the follow-up, and among boys, most diagnoses (80%) were made by the age of 6 years (Table 1, Fig 1).

Table 1. Cumulative incidences and median ages at diagnosis of primary and secondary disorders associated with tall stature and that of idiopathic tall stature.

Disorder (n) Cumulative incidence per 100 000 children [95% CI] CMIb at 18 years Median age at diagnosis, years (IQRc)
Agea, years
0 2 6 10 14 18
Klinefelter syndrome
Boys (167) 6.2 [4.4, 8.5] 13.2 [10.5, 16.5] 18.8 [15.5, 22.8] 27.2 [22.8, 32.3] 34.0 [28.6, 40.3] 46.6 [38.8, 55.7] 1/2146 8.4 (1.1–14.4)
47,XYY syndrome
Boys (96) 2.6 [1.5, 4.2] 4.3 [2.9, 6.3] 11.0 [8.4, 14.3] 17.9 [14.3, 22.3] 23.1 [18.6, 28.6] 26.1 [20.5, 32.9] 1/3837 6.5 (3.8–12.0)
Triple X syndrome
Girls (68) 3.2 [2.0, 5.1] 6.4 [4.5, 8.8] 10.3 [7.8, 13.5] 13.0 [10.0, 16.6] 15.1 [11.7, 19.4] 15.9 [12.3, 20.6] 1/6277 3.7 (0.1–8.2)
Fragile X syndrome
Girls (39) 0.5 [0.2, 1.6] 1.1 [0.5, 2.3] 5.3 [3.6, 7.8] 9.1 [6.6, 12.5] 9.5 [6.9, 13.1] 9.5 [6.9, 13.1] 1/10500 5.7 (3.8–7.5)
Boys (133) 0.2 [0.0, 1.1] 6.4 [4.6, 8.9] 22.8 [18.9, 27.3] 25.8 [21.6, 30.7] 28.3 [23.7, 33.7] 28.3 [23.7, 33.7] 1/3531 3.5 (2.2–5.0)
Marfan syndrome
Girls (92) 0.5 [0.2, 1.6] 7.4 [5.4, 10.0] 12.0 [9.3, 15.3] 17.2 [13.7, 21.5] 21.2 [16.9, 26.3] 23.2 [18.5, 29.0] 1/4307 5.9 (1.3–10.0)
Boys (65) 0.5 [0.2, 1.5] 4.8 [3.2, 6.9] 8.3 [6.1, 11.1] 10.5 [7.9, 13.7] 13.4 [10.1, 17.6] 19.2 [14.1, 26.0] 1/5202 7.1 (2.0–15.0)
Congenital over-growth syndromed
Girls (99) 0.7 [0.3, 1.8] 10.9 [8.4, 14.0] 17.5 [14.2, 21.5] 19.3 [15.7, 23.6] 21.2 [17.2, 26.0] 21.2 [17.2, 26.0] 1/4717 1.7 (0.7–5.3)
Boys (101) 2.4 [1.4, 4.0] 10.7 [8.3, 13.8] 16.3 [13.2, 20.1] 18.7 [15.3, 22.9] 19.7 [16.0, 24.0] 20.3 [16.5, 24.9] 1/4925 1.8 (0.4–4.6)
Congenital adrenal hyperplasia
Girls (28) 1.4 [0.7, 2.8] 4.2 [2.7, 6.2] 4.8 [3.2, 7.0] 5.4 [3.7, 7.8] 5.4 [3.7, 7.8] 5.4 [3.7, 7.8] 1/18474 0.1 (0.0–1.6)
Boys (40) 0.7 [0.2, 1.8] 3.4 [2.2, 5.3] 6.2 [4.4, 8.7] 7.3 [5.3, 10.1] 8.1 [5.8, 11.1] 8.7 [6.2, 12.1] 1/11494 4.0 (0.1–7.3)
Hyperthyroidism
Girls (176) 0 1.1 [0.5, 2.4] 3.5 [2.2, 5.6] 12.0 [8.9, 16.1] 41.3 [33.8, 50.3] 106.9 [90.1, 126.3] 1/936 15.1 (12.7–16.6)
Boys (41) 0 1.2 [0.6, 2.5] 2.9 [1.7, 4,8] 4.9 [3.2, 7.5] 8.2 [5.6, 11.9] 17.6 [12.0, 25.5] 1/5675 14.4 (9.6–16.5)
Idiopathic tall stature
Girls (844) 0 30.4 [26.0, 35.4] 105.3 [96.3, 114.9] 176.3 [163.7, 189.6] 210.5 [195.9, 226.0] 229.3 [213.2, 246.6] 1/436 6.5 (3.6–9.6)
Boys (844) 0 35.4 [30.7, 40.7] 94.8 [86.6, 103.7] 169.2 [157.2, 181.9] 200.9 [187.0. 215.7] 220.3 [204.5, 237.1] 1/454 6.6 (3.5–9.6)

aAge points 0, 2, 6, 10 and 14 years represent the ages at growth monitoring visits in the Finnish health care; age point 18 years gives the estimate of the final CMI of the conditions.

bCMI, cumulative incidence, expressed as 1/whole number

cIQR, interquartile range (from the 25th to 75th percentiles)

dIncludes Sotos syndrome, Beckwith–Wiedemann syndrome, and other congenital overgrowth syndromes.

Fig 1. Cumulative incidence of Klinefelter syndrome, 47,XYY syndrome, triple X syndrome, and Fragile X syndrome from birth to 18 years of age.

Fig 1

The study population included 157 children (41% boys) diagnosed with MFS. The CMI of MFS was 23/100 000 in girls (95% CI 18.5–29.0) and 19/100 000 in boys (95% CI 14.1–26.0) at 18 years (Table 1, Fig 2). Congenital overgrowth syndrome (COS) was diagnosed in a total of 200 children (51% boys) during the follow-up (Table 1, Fig 2). Of the children with COS, 40.5% had Beckwith–Wiedemann syndrome, 40.5% had Sotos syndrome, and 19% had other congenital syndromes including an early overgrowth phenotype (e.g., Weaver syndrome; see S1 Table for detailed information). Most diagnoses were made by the age of 6 years (81% in boys and 84% in girls).

Fig 2. Cumulative incidence of congenital overgrowth syndromes, Marfan syndrome, and congenital adrenal hyperplasia from birth to 18 years of age.

Fig 2

CAH was diagnosed in 68 children (59% boys) during the follow-up, and most diagnoses were made by the age of 6 years (89% in girls and 72% in boys) (Table 1, Fig 2). Of the CAH diagnoses, 45 (66%) were the subtype E25.00 (salt-losing CAH) and 23 were subtype E25.01 (other or unspecified CAH, including 21-hydroxylase deficiency).

Acquired growth disorders

The study population included 217 children (19% boys) diagnosed with hyperthyroidism by the age of 18 years (Table 1). Of these, 208 (95.9%) had thyrotoxicosis with diffuse goitre (E05.0) and 9 (4.1%) had thyrotoxicosis with toxic nodular goitre (E05.1-2). Of the diagnosed children, 151 girls (86%) and 27 boys (66%) had at least one purchase of an antithyroid preparation (carbimazole; 177 children).

CPP before 8 years in girls and 9 years in boys was diagnosed in 498 children (15% boys) (Table 2). Of the diagnosed children, 162 girls (38%) and 25 boys (32%) had at least one purchase of leuprorelin. The median age at the first purchase was 7.3 years for girls (range 1.4–10.2 years) and 7.4 years for boys (range 1.0–8.8 years).

Table 2. Cumulative incidence and median age at diagnosis of children diagnosed with central precocious puberty. By definition, puberty is precocious if observed before age 8 in girls and age 9 in boys.

Disorder (n) Cumulative incidence per 100 000 children [95% CI] CMI at 8a or 9b years Median age at diagnosis, years (IQRc)
Age, years
0 2 6 8 9
Central precocious puberty
Girls (421) 0 4.2 [2.7, 6.3] 22.4 [18.4, 27.1] 111.8 [101.5, 123.0] 1/894 7.3 (6.3–7.7)
Boys (77) 0 0.5 [0.2, 1.6] 3.8 [2.4, 6.0] 10.4 [7.7, 14.1] 20.6 [16.4, 25.7] 1/4856 7.9 (6.6–8.6)

a8 years among girls, and

b9 years among boys

cIQR, interquartile range (from the 25th to 75th percentiles)

Idiopathic tall stature

ITS was diagnosed in 1688 children (50% boys) during the follow-up and was the most common diagnosis in the present study (50.7% of all diagnoses). At 6 years of age, the CMI of ITS was already 105/100 000 in girls (95% CI 96.3–114.9) and 95/100 000 in boys (95% CI 86.6–103.7) (Table 1).

Discussion

This 20-year birth cohort study is among the first to report broad, nationwide age- and sex-specific epidemiological data on primary and secondary disorders associated with tall stature in childhood. Tall stature is rare: only 0.14% of the whole birth cohort of over 1.1 million children had a primary or secondary disorder associated with tall stature. This was only one-sixth of the diagnoses associated with short stature found in the same birth cohort [17]. The results also show that tall stature disorders are probably underdiagnosed or the diagnoses are delayed, possibly reflecting wider social acceptance of tall stature than short stature during childhood [25]. An early diagnosis is important for managing treatable comorbidities and for optimizing adult height. Thus far, there has been a lack of epidemiological data for the development of evidence-based growth-monitoring programs for tall stature. Based on these results, we suggest that in early childhood, the focus of growth screening should be particularly on Marfan syndrome and congenital overgrowth syndromes, with the addition of Klinefelter syndrome and central precocious puberty.

The general incidence of MFS is about 2–3 per 10 000 individuals and it was the most common primary cause of extremely tall stature in a Finnish cohort study which consisted of children born between 1990 and 2010 in Southern Finland [26,27]. In a large Taiwanese cohort study, Chiu et al. reported that the birth incidence of MFS is at least 1 per 4286 people [28]. Thus, the CMI of MFS obtained in the present study is closely comparable with that of other studies. Erkula et al. stated that in both sexes, a stature equal to the 95th centile (+2 SDs) of the general population was already passed at three years of age [29]. Early diagnosis and timely medical interventions are crucial because patients with MFS carry a high risk of morbidity and premature mortality. Consequently, MFS acts as an important target condition elucidating growth monitoring practices.

KS (47,XXY) is the most common sex chromosome aneuploidy and is estimated to occur in 100–200 per 100 000 males [8]. Underdiagnosis of KS is common and reflected also by the relatively low number of diagnoses in the present study: the CMI of KS was only 47 per 100 000 at 18 years. The median age at diagnosis was 8.4 years, and the diagnostic frequency was at its highest in pubertal years. A Danish study of pre- and postnatal prevalence of KS in children born between 1970 and 2000 reported that only about 10% were diagnosed before puberty [8]. Many cases are diagnosed later in adulthood when men are evaluated for infertility or hypogonadism, but up to three-fourths of cases remain undetected due to subtle phenotypes including tall and slender body structure [ 8,30]. Based on the present and previous observations, there is a need for improvement in the timely diagnosis of KS. Boys with KS often suffer from language and academic difficulties and psychological distress, which could be alleviated with proper support and neuropsychological care [31]. Furthermore, treatment with testosterone is beneficial for the normal development and maintenance of muscle and bone, as well as secondary sexual characteristics during and after puberty [32]. The present study indicates that the majority of boys diagnosed with KS do not receive testosterone medication.

Other sex chromosome aneuploidies associated with tall stature are rare. Two old studies from Denmark and the USA reported the incidence of XYY as varying from 1 per 851 to 1 per 3910 boys [9,33]. Thus, the CMI of XYY in the present study, 1 per 3837 boys at 18 years, is in the lower range. However, approximately 85% of males with XYY or more are never diagnosed, and most affected males have only a few phenotypic abnormalities, including tall stature [6,34].

The Danish study estimated the incidence of triple X to be as high as 1 per 1000 girls, which is six times more than the CMI obtained in the present study [9]. Although it is a congenital disorder, the majority remain undiagnosed [35]. Most triple X girls have only minor problems and subtle phenotype, but the final height is commonly at or above the 75th percentile [36,37].

Unlike chromosome aneuploidies, congenital overgrowth syndromes (COS) often have other distinct features in addition to tall stature, which is also a distinct feature in early life. In fact, our results showed that over 80% of COS cases were diagnosed before the age of 6 years. There is very little data on the epidemiology of COS, and there are no previous data on sex- and age-specific incidence values. We found that the CMI of COS at 18 years is at the same level as that of MFS, and there are no sex-specific differences.

In a large systematic review and meta-analysis published in 2014, FXS was estimated to occur in 1/7134 males and 1/11 111 females in total [38]. The present study offers CMI values from birth until the age of 18 years when the CMI of FXS was 1/3531 for boys and 1/10 500 for girls. Notably, FXS is three times more common among boys, and 80% of FXS boys were already diagnosed by the age of six years, when the prepubertal growth acceleration may be seen, too [10].

Endocrine conditions associated with tall stature include CAH (congenital condition), and hyperthyroidism and precocious puberty (acquired conditions). Newborn screening for CAH was started in Finland only after the present birth cohort was collected. This is probably reflected in the higher median age at diagnosis in boys than in girls (4.0 versus 0.1 years) who often suffer from virilization of external genitalia at birth [39]. The CMI of 4.8/100 000 in girls and 6.2/100 000 in boys are in line with previous figures from the UK, indicating that approximately 1 of every 18 000 newborns has CAH [39]. A higher prevalence, 15.0 and 9.0 per 100,000 newborn females and males, respectively, was reported in a Danish study based on newborn screening, which also found milder forms of CAH [40]. A Finnish study showed that among a group of children with CAH diagnosed later in childhood, growth was already accelerated in infancy, but the adult height was low among boys [41]. However, newborn screening for CAH is now universal; therefore, CAH is not a primary target for growth screening.

Hyperthyroidism may cause acceleration in linear growth and advancement of skeletal maturation with the simultaneous loss of weight as an early sign of the condition [42]. Hyperthyroidism is rare in childhood but becomes more prevalent in adolescence as observed also in the present study. The rate of hyperthyroidism in children and adolescents in Northern Europe was 0.1 per 100 000 and 3 per 100 000 person-years, with a female-to-male predominance of 5:1 [43]. This is not directly comparable to CMI figures, which were considerably higher in our study. We observed that the difference between girls and boys in the CMI of hyperthyroidism already appears in childhood and becomes more evident over the years. At the age of 18 years, it was six times higher in girls compared to boys. The majority (86% of girls and 66% of boys) had at least one purchase of antithyroid medication, indicating distinct symptomatic disease and good diagnostic accuracy.

There are only a few studies on the prevalence and incidence of precocious puberty. A Danish register study of children born between 1993 and 2001 estimated that 0.2% of all girls (200 per 100 000) and less than 0.05% of boys (50 per 100 000) had some form of precocious pubertal development [44]. However, the results may be slightly overestimated because they included all forms of precocious puberty (CPP, premature thelarche, and premature adrenarche), and the age limit for CPP (9 years in girls and 10 years in boys) was extended by about 1 year. Another study examined 250 children (226 girls) diagnosed with CPP in Spain and revealed a low annual incidence of CPP ranging from 0.02 to 1.07 new cases per 100 000 [45].

The CMI values of CPP in the present study are between the values obtained in the previous two studies. Although incidence varies significantly among different populations, these studies show that precocious puberty is much more common among girls. Early development of secondary sexual characteristics and linear growth acceleration are important features of precocious puberty and should prompt further investigations [16]. The present study revealed that approximately one-third of children had purchased leuprorelin at the time of CPP diagnosis. Further studies are needed to assess their growth before diagnosis and the impact of medication on their final height.

Most individuals with tall stature are not diagnosed with any underlying pathological cause and are therefore diagnosed with ITS. In fact, ITS was the most common diagnosis in the present study (50.7% of all diagnoses). Girls and boys were diagnosed equally, which was also observed in another study [27]. Although ITS cannot be considered an actual target condition for growth screening, it is crucial to distinguish it from rare pathologic conditions. Consequently, unnecessary investigations could be avoided. However, ITS is a diagnosis of exclusion, and methods including molecular genetics might reveal pathology among children with ITS.

Strengths

This study has several strengths. First, the study population was large with over 1.1 million individuals representing the whole child population born in 20 years. Second, the population was carefully monitored by one of the world’s most extensive monitoring programs for childhood growth and health with over 20 check-ups [46,47]. If growth screening was abnormal, further examinations were performed systematically to diagnose the potential cause [48,49]. Therefore, it is probable that diagnoses of growth disorders are obtained in a timely manner in Finland. Third, the nationwide registers are shown to be good data sources [50].

Limitations

Migration was not taken into account when calculating the CMI due to a lack of data. However, the number of emigrants/immigrants is known to be small, and disregarding migration is unlikely to influence the results significantly. We were not able to subdivide ITS into familial (or constitutional) and non-familial tall stature because the ICD-10 code for ITS does not differentiate between these forms, and fathers’ heights were not available.

Furthermore, there can be differences in the genetic predisposition to various growth disorders between populations, so our data may not be generalizable to all populations. However, based on the discussed literature, this does not seem probable. Since we did not have access to the actual growth measurements, we can only speculate about how the yield of growth monitoring would mirror these data.

Conclusions

This population-based study has provided the first age- and sex-specific epidemiological data on several primary and secondary disorders associated with tall stature. These disorders proved to be rather rare yet underdiagnosed in childhood. We suggest that during early childhood, the focus of growth screening should be particularly on MFS and congenital overgrowth syndromes, with the addition of KS and CPP thereafter. It is important to distinguish these pathological causes from ITS, which represented half of all cases associated with tall stature.

Supporting information

S1 Table. Congenital malformation syndromes involving early overgrowth: specific name and frequencies during the follow-up.

(PDF)

pone.0321798.s001.pdf (62.4KB, pdf)

Data Availability

The health data used in the study arise from the nationwide registers. The individual-level health data that support the findings of this study are neither publicly available nor to be shared because they contain potentially identifying and sensitive patient information. However, other researchers can request similar register data from the Finnish Social and Health Data Permit Authority (Findata; https://findata.fi/en).

Funding Statement

The work was supported by: The Kuopio University Hospital State Research Funding (https://pshyvinvointialue.fi/web/en/state-research-funding), (SH, AS, and US); The Finnish Medical Foundation (https://laaketieteensaatio.fi/en/home/), (AS and SH); The Foundation for Paediatric Research (https://www.lastentautientutkimussaatio.fi/in-english/), (US and AS); and The Päivikki and Sakari Sohlberg Foundation (https://pss-saatio.fi/en/), (US, AS, and SH). The funders of the study had no role in the study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Hannema SE, Sävendahl L. Tall stature. In: Huhtaniemi I, Martini L, editors. Encyclopedia of endocrine diseases. 2nd ed. Oxford: Academic Press; 2019. p. 94–101. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-801238-3.65337-0 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Hermanussen M, Cole J. The calculation of target height reconsidered. Horm Res. 2003;59(4):180–3. doi: 10.1159/000069321 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Wit JM, Ranke MB, Kelnar CJH. ESPE classification of paediatric endocrine diagnoses. Horm Res. 2007;68(2):8–13. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Davies JH, Cheetham T. Investigation and management of tall stature. Arch Dis Child. 2014;99(8):772–7. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2013-304830 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Aksglaede L, Skakkebaek NE, Almstrup K, Juul A. Clinical and biological parameters in 166 boys, adolescents and adults with nonmosaic Klinefelter syndrome: a Copenhagen experience. Acta Paediatr. 2011;100(6):793–806. doi: 10.1111/j.1651-2227.2011.02246.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Bardsley MZ, Kowal K, Levy C, Gosek A, Ayari N, Tartaglia N, et al. 47,XYY syndrome: clinical phenotype and timing of ascertainment. J Pediatr. 2013;163(4):1085–94. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2013.05.037 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Tartaglia NR, Howell S, Sutherland A, Wilson R, Wilson L. A review of trisomy X (47,XXX). Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2010;5:8. doi: 10.1186/1750-1172-5-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Bojesen A, Juul S, Gravholt CH. Prenatal and postnatal prevalence of Klinefelter syndrome: a national registry study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2003;88(2):622–6. doi: 10.1210/jc.2002-021491 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Nielsen J, Wohlert M. Sex chromosome abnormalities found among 34,910 newborn children: results from a 13-year incidence study in Arhus, Denmark. Birth Defects Orig Artic Ser. 1990;26(4):209–23. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Loesch DZ, Huggins RM, Hoang NH. Growth in stature in fragile X families: a mixed longitudinal study. Am J Med Genet. 1995;58(3):249–56. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.1320580311 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Albuquerque EVA, Scalco RC, Jorge AAL. Management of endocrine disease: diagnostic and therapeutic approach of tall stature. Eur J Endocrinol. 2017;176(6):R339–53. doi: 10.1530/EJE-16-1054 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Corredor B, Dattani M, Gertosio C, Bozzola M. Tall stature: a challenge for clinicians. Curr Pediatr Rev. 2019;15(1):10–21. doi: 10.2174/1573396314666181105092917 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Meazza C, Gertosio C, Giacchero R, Pagani S, Bozzola M. Tall stature: a difficult diagnosis?. Ital J Pediatr. 2017;43(1):66. doi: 10.1186/s13052-017-0385-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Hargitai G, Sólyom J, Battelino T, Lebl J, Pribilincová Z, Hauspie R, et al. Growth patterns and final height in congenital adrenal hyperplasia due to classical 21-hydroxylase deficiency. Results of a multicenter study. Horm Res. 2001;55(4):161–71. doi: 10.1159/000049990 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Rostomyan L, Daly AF, Petrossians P, Nachev E, Lila AR, Lecoq A-L, et al. Clinical and genetic characterization of pituitary gigantism: an international collaborative study in 208 patients. Endocr Relat Cancer. 2015;22(5):745–57. doi: 10.1530/ERC-15-0320 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Kota AS, Ejaz S. StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2022. Precocious Puberty. [Cited 2023 Feb 24]. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK544313/ [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Harju S, Saari A, Sund R, Sankilampi U. Epidemiology of disorders associated with short stature in childhood: a 20-year birth cohort study in Finland. Clin Epidemiol. 2022;14:1205–14. doi: 10.2147/CLEP.S372870 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Lauffer P, Kamp GA, Menke LA, Wit JM, Oostdijk W, . Towards a rational and efficient diagnostic approach in children referred for tall stature and/or accelerated growth to the general paediatrician. Horm Res Paediatr. 2019;91(5):293–310. doi: 10.1159/000500810 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare (THL). Medical Birth Register. 2019. [Accessed 2019 Sep 1]. Available from: https://thl.fi/en/web/thlfi-en/statistics-and-data/data-and-services/register-descriptions/newborns [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Official Statistics of Finland (OSF). Live births by sex and mother’s age (5-year) and origin and background country, 1990-2020. 2022. [Accessed 2022 Sep 12]. Available from: https://pxdata.stat.fi/PxWeb/pxweb/en/StatFin/StatFin__synt/statfin_synt_pxt_12dp.px/ [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare (THL). Care Register for Health Care. 2018. [Accessed 2022 Dec 1]. Available from: https://thl.fi/en/web/thlfi-en/statistics-and-data/data-and-services/register-descriptions/care-register-for-health-care [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Official Statistics of Finland (OSF). Deaths. 2020. [Accessed 2020 Aug 17]. Available from: http://www.stat.fi/til/kuol/index_en.html [Google Scholar]
  • 23.The Social Insurance Institution of Finland. Statistics on reimbursements for prescription medicines. 2019. [Accessed 2023 Feb 24]. Available from: https://www.kela.fi/web/en/statistics-by-topic/reimbursements-for-prescription-medicines [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Coemans M, Verbeke G, Döhler B, Süsal C, Naesens M. Bias by censoring for competing events in survival analysis. BMJ. 2022;378:e071349. doi: 10.1136/bmj-2022-071349 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Batty GD, Shipley MJ, Gunnell D, Huxley R, Kivimaki M, Woodward M, et al. Height, wealth, and health: an overview with new data from three longitudinal studies. Econ Hum Biol. 2009;7(2):137–52. doi: 10.1016/j.ehb.2009.06.004 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Judge DP, Dietz HC. Marfan’s syndrome. Lancet. 2005;366(9501):1965–76. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67789-6 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Kärkinen J, Sorakunnas E, Miettinen PJ, Raivio T, Hero M. The aetiology of extreme tall stature in a screened Finnish paediatric population. EClinicalMedicine. 2021;42:101208. doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.101208 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Chiu H-H, Wu M-H, Chen H-C, Kao F-Y, Huang S-K. Epidemiological profile of Marfan syndrome in a general population: a national database study. Mayo Clin Proc. 2014;89(1):34–42. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2013.08.022 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Erkula G, Jones KB, Sponseller PD, Dietz HC, Pyeritz RE. Growth and maturation in Marfan syndrome. Am J Med Genet. 2002;109(2):100–15. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.10312 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Los E, Ford GA. StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2022. Klinefelter Syndrome. [Cited 2023 Mar 30]. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK482314/ [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Rovet J, Netley C, Keenan M, Bailey J, Stewart D. The psychoeducational profile of boys with Klinefelter syndrome. J Learn Disabil. 1996;29(2):180–96. doi: 10.1177/002221949602900208 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Smyth CM, Bremner WJ. Klinefelter syndrome. Arch Intern Med. 1998;158(12):1309–14. doi: 10.1001/archinte.158.12.1309 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Goad WB, Robinson A, Puck TT. Incidence of aneuploidy in a human population. Am J Hum Genet. 1976;28(1):62–8. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Sood B, Clemente Fuentes RW. StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2023. Jacobs Syndrome. [Cited 2023 Apr 14]. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK557699/ [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Gustavson KH. Triple X syndrome deviation with mild symptoms. The majority goes undiagnosed. Lakartidningen. 1999;96(50):5646–7. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Otter M, Schrander-Stumpel CTRM, Curfs LMG. Triple X syndrome: a review of the literature. Eur J Hum Genet. 2010;18(3):265–71. doi: 10.1038/ejhg.2009.109 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Stewart DA, Netley CT, Park E. Summary of clinical findings of children with 47,XXY, 47,XYY, and 47,XXX karyotypes. Birth Defects Orig Artic Ser. 1982;18(4):1–5. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Hunter J, Rivero-Arias O, Angelov A, Kim E, Fotheringham I, Leal J. Epidemiology of fragile X syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Med Genet A. 2014;164A(7):1648–58. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.a.36511 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Khalid JM, Oerton JM, Dezateux C, Hindmarsh PC, Kelnar CJ, Knowles RL. Incidence and clinical features of congenital adrenal hyperplasia in Great Britain. Arch Dis Child. 2012;97(2):101–6. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2011-300234 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Berglund A, Ornstrup MJ, Lind-Holst M, Dunø M, Bækvad-Hansen M, Juul A, et al. Epidemiology and diagnostic trends of congenital adrenal hyperplasia in Denmark: a retrospective, population-based study. Lancet Reg Health Eur. 2023;28:100598. doi: 10.1016/j.lanepe.2023.100598 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Jääskeläinen J, Voutilainen R. Growth of patients with 21-hydroxylase deficiency: an analysis of the factors influencing adult height. Pediatr Res. 1997;41(1):30–3. doi: 10.1203/00006450-199701000-00005 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Segni M. Disorders of the thyroid gland in infancy, childhood and adolescence. In: Feingold KR, Anawalt B, Blackman MR, et al., editors. Endotext. South Dartmouth (MA): MDText.com. 2000. [Updated 2017 Mar 18]. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK279032/ [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Metwalley KA, Farghaly HS. Graves’ disease in children: an update. Clin Med Insights Endocrinol Diabetes. 2023;16:11795514221150615. doi: 10.1177/11795514221150615 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Teilmann G, Pedersen CB, Jensen TK, Skakkebaek NE, Juul A. Prevalence and incidence of precocious pubertal development in Denmark: an epidemiologic study based on national registries. Pediatrics. 2005;116(6):1323–8. doi: 10.1542/peds.2005-0012 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Soriano-Guillén L, Corripio R, Labarta JI, Cañete R, Castro-Feijóo L, Espino R, et al. Central precocious puberty in children living in Spain: incidence, prevalence, and influence of adoption and immigration. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2010;95(9):4305–13. doi: 10.1210/jc.2010-1025 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.The Parliament of Finland. Kansanterveyslaki (Public Health Act). Helsinki; 1972. Available from: https://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/alkup/1972/19720066 [Google Scholar]
  • 47.The Parliament of Finland. Terveydenhuoltolaki (Health Care Act). Helsinki; 2010. Available from: https://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/alkup/2010/20101326 [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Rova M. Historia. Lastenneuvolakäsikirja (History. Handbook for child welfare clinics). Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare (THL); 2018. [Accessed 2019 Sep 1]. Available from: https://thl.fi/fi/web/lastenneuvolakasikirja/lastenneuvolatyon-perusteet/lastenneuvolajarjestelma/historia [Google Scholar]
  • 49.The Ministry of Social Affairs and Health (STM). Government Decree on maternity and child health clinic services, school and student health services and preventive oral health services for children and youth. 2011. Available from: https://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/alkup/2011/20110338 [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Sund R. Quality of the Finnish Hospital Discharge Register: a systematic review. Scand J Public Health. 2012;40(6):505–15. doi: 10.1177/1403494812456637 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
PLoS One. 2025 Apr 15;20(4):e0321798. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0321798.r001

Author response to Decision Letter 0


Transfer Alert

This paper was transferred from another journal. As a result, its full editorial history (including decision letters, peer reviews and author responses) may not be present.

12 Aug 2024

Decision Letter 0

Bert B Little

17 Oct 2024

PONE-D-24-32281Epidemiology of disorders associated with tall stature in childhood: a 20-year birth cohort studyPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Harju,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Dec 01 2024 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org . When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols .

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Bert B. Little, MA, PhD, FAAAS, FRAI, FRSM, FRSPH

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. We note that you have indicated that there are restrictions to data sharing for this study. PLOS only allows data to be available upon request if there are legal or ethical restrictions on sharing data publicly. For more information on unacceptable data access restrictions, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. Before we proceed with your manuscript, please address the following prompts: a) If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially identifying or sensitive patient information, data are owned by a third-party organization, etc.) and who has imposed them (e.g., a Research Ethics Committee or Institutional Review Board, etc.). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent. b) If there are no restrictions, please upload the minimal anonymized data set necessary to replicate your study findings to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. For a list of recommended repositories, please see https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/recommended-repositories. You also have the option of uploading the data as Supporting Information files, but we would recommend depositing data directly to a data repository if possible. We will update your Data Availability statement on your behalf to reflect the information you provide.

3. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and update any in-text citations to match accordingly. Please see our Supporting Information guidelines for more information: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/supporting-information

4. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

Additional Editor Comments:

Dear Authors-

Please revise according to the reviewers' comments.

In particular, the more specificity of the disorders that can be provided, the more value the manuscript will have for readers.

Please try to be as specific as possible, do no aggregate disorders. The reviewer is requesting disaggregation.

The revisions are minor, and we look forward to a revision in the near future.

Best regards,

Bert Little, PhD, FAAAS, FRAI, FRSM, FRSPH

Academic Editor

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The manuscript is a retrospective cohort study that investigated the cumulative incidence of primary and secondary disorders associated with tall stature in Finland over a 20-year period, from 1998 to 2017, among children up to 18 years of age. The findings suggest that some disorders remain undiagnosed. Special focus is given to Marfan syndrome, congenital overgrowth syndromes, Klinefelter syndrome, and central precocious puberty, which presented higher cumulative incidences.

The research appears to be well-conducted; however, the paper is somewhat confusing in regards to the diseases investigated. Specifically, there is inconsistency in the syndromes discussed across the abstract, introduction, and methods sections. Not all of the disorders are mentioned in each section, making it difficult for the reader to follow.

Minor issues:

The background section of the abstract could benefit from a clearer statement of the research aim.

In the introduction, adding more epidemiological information about the disorders investigated would be helpful, either individually or grouped as primary and secondary growth disorders if literature is scarce. Including global prevalence or incidence rates, especially in countries with similar characteristics to Finland, would strengthen this section. As it stands, it feels more like a list of syndrome definitions.

Make the importance of the research clearer and highlight why such rare conditions should be investigated.

In line 76, the term "essential disorders" could be clarified by listing the specific disorders the paper focuses on, helping the reader to know what to expect in the methods and results sections. Furthermore, in lines 93-99, not all of the investigated disorders are mentioned.

The discussion section is overly long and could benefit from summarization. The authors could prioritize key findings at the beginning, dedicating more space to discussing them in relation to existing literature. Less significant findings can follow, discussed in a more concise manner.

When comparing this manuscript's results with those from other studies, provide more context about those studies (e.g., location, study period, etc.), so that the reader can assess how comparable the results are.

Reviewer #2: Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

I believe the manuscript is technically sound and the data support the conclusions because of the following:

- The problem, study aim, and possible benefits from this research is well defined and stated in the introduction section.

- Results support the suggestion that during early childhood, growth screening should take place among patients with MFS and congenital overgrowth syndromes, with the addition of KS and CPP in later years.

Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

- Aalen Johansen cumulative incidence function is appropriate. However, it is important explain why the presentation of age groups in table 1 and 2 is important. Please explain the rationality behind age categories and why it is different for table 1 and 2.

- I don't see the graphs of the functions in the manuscript although I see title for Figure 1 and 2. I believe it may be technical problem.

Overall, this is an interesting research. Please update the methods and results section acccordingly.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy .

Reviewer #1: Yes:  Caroline Zani Rodrigues

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/ . PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org . Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2025 Apr 15;20(4):e0321798. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0321798.r003

Author response to Decision Letter 1


29 Nov 2024

Response to Reviewers

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for

file naming.

AU: We have now checked that the manuscript meets PLOS One’s style requirements.

2. We note that you have indicated that there are restrictions to data sharing for this study. PLOS

only allows data to be available upon request if there are legal or ethical restrictions on sharing data

publicly. For more information on unacceptable data access restrictions, please see

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. Before

we proceed with your manuscript, please address the following prompts: a) If there are ethical or

legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain

potentially identifying or sensitive patient information, data are owned by a third-party

organization, etc.) and who has imposed them (e.g., a Research Ethics Committee or Institutional

Review Board, etc.). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics

committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent.

AU: Thank you for pointing this out. The permissions obtained from the maintainers of the

data (THL, Statistics Finland, and Social Insurance Institution), as required by the Finnish

legislation, do not allow the sharing of data. Some of the conditions associated with tall

stature are extremely rare and the data may contain potentially identifying or sensitive

patient material. However, other researchers can request similar register data from the

Finnish Social and Health Data Permit Authority (Findata; https://findata.fi/en).

We have now rewritten the data-sharing statement in the revised manuscript.

3. Please include captions for your Supporting Information files at the end of your manuscript, and

update any in-text citations to match accordingly.

AU: Caption for Supporting Information is now included at the end of the manuscript and

in-text citations match accordingly.

4. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers

that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove

these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list

should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to

cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a

citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

AU: We have now double-checked that we do not cite any papers that have been retracted

(until November 15, 2024). We have updated reference numbers 36 and 37 (in the former

reference list) to refer to the original studies. A few references became useless after the

revision and shortening of discussion and have been removed. The changes can be seen in

the “Manuscript with track changes”, which includes the former and current reference lists.

Additional Editor Comments:

Dear Authors-Please revise according to the reviewers' comments.

In particular, the more specificity of the disorders that can be provided, the more value the

manuscript will have for readers.

Please try to be as specific as possible, do no aggregate disorders. The reviewer is requesting

disaggregation.

AU: Thank you for these comments. We have now revised the manuscript based on the

reviewers’ comments. To be as specific as possible, we follow the ESPE (European

Society of Paediatric Endocrinology) classification of paediatric disorders associated with

tall stature (Wit JM, Ranke MB, Kelnar CJH. ESPE classification of paediatric endocrine

diagnoses. Horm Res. 2007;68(2):8-13). Each disorder is managed separately, and girls and

boys are presented as their own groups. Likewise in ESPE classification, congenital

overgrowth syndromes are handled as a single disease entity since they strongly overlap

each other and they are also very rare. However, information on the exact frequencies of

congenital overgrowth syndromes is given in the Supporting information at the end of the

manuscript. In some cases, disorders are grouped as primary (congenital), secondary

(acquired) or idiopathic tall stature. This division is important and it also has significance in

clinical work.

Reviewer #1:

The manuscript is a retrospective cohort study that investigated the cumulative

incidence of primary and secondary disorders associated with tall stature in Finland over a 20-year

period, from 1998 to 2017, among children up to 18 years of age. The findings suggest that some

disorders remain undiagnosed. Special focus is given to Marfan syndrome, congenital overgrowth

syndromes, Klinefelter syndrome, and central precocious puberty, which presented higher

cumulative incidences.

The research appears to be well-conducted; however, the paper is somewhat confusing in regards to

the diseases investigated. Specifically, there is inconsistency in the syndromes discussed across the

abstract, introduction, and methods sections. Not all of the disorders are mentioned in each section,

making it difficult for the reader to follow.

AU: Thank you for pointing this out. Throughout the manuscript we stick to the European

Society of Pediatric Endocrinology (ESPE) classification of tall stature disorders (Wit JM et

al, 2007) and to the basic division of these conditions into primary and secondary disorders.

Many of those conditions are rare. To improve the manuscript’s readability, we have now

limited the number of disorders presented in the Abstract to a few examples of the most

common primary and secondary conditions associated with tall stature. However, in the

other parts of the manuscript (Introduction, Methods and Results), more comprehensive and

detailed disease-specific data are presented to provide a thorough outline of various

conditions behind tall stature in childhood.

Minor issues:

The background section of the abstract could benefit from a clearer statement of the research aim.

AU: Thank you for the comment. We have revised the abstract so that the research aim is

more clearly stated: “This retrospective population-based cohort study aims to specify the

epidemiological data that are needed to develop better diagnostic practices.”

In the introduction, adding more epidemiological information about the disorders investigated

would be helpful, either individually or grouped as primary and secondary growth disorders if

literature is scarce. Including global prevalence or incidence rates, especially in countries with

similar characteristics to Finland, would strengthen this section. As it stands, it feels more like a list

of syndrome definitions.

AU: Thank you for the suggestion. We have now included general incidences of several

disorders (Marfan syndrome, Klinefelter syndrome, XYY syndrome, and triple X syndrome)

in the introduction. We also believe it is helpful for readers. However, it is important to

remember that those values are not directly comparable with the age- and sex-specific

cumulative incidences found in the present study. We did not find other studies reporting

age- and sex-specific cumulative incidences for the selected disorders.

Make the importance of the research clearer and highlight why such rare conditions should be

investigated.

AU: Thank you for your suggestion. We agree that many of the chosen conditions are rare

and it may raise questions regarding their value as research targets. We have now

added a short phrase to the abstract and we believe it makes the research aim and

importance clearer: ”This retrospective population-based birth cohort study aims to

specify the epidemiological data that is needed to develop better diagnostic practices.”

However, the epidemiology of disorders associated with tall stature is so poorly

characterized that it already gives us a basis to investigate it. Rare disorders may have

various lifelong consequences for the patient and his/her close relatives and should therefore

not be considered insignificant. Furthermore, this kind of long-term nationwide cohort study

is a reliable and often the only way to search the epidemiology of rare disorders. We try to

underline the importance of the study also at the end of the introduction: ”Such data are

needed to develop evidence-based growth-screening programs and better diagnostic

practices of disorders associated with tall stature in paediatric health care worldwide. Timely

diagnosis of underlying conditions is important to prevent permanent effects on physical

health and adult height and to support children’s development.”

In line 76, the term "essential disorders" could be clarified by listing the specific disorders the paper

focuses on, helping the reader to know what to expect in the methods and results sections.

Furthermore, in lines 93-99, not all of the investigated disorders are mentioned.

AU: Thank you for pointing this out. We have replaced the word ”essential disorders” with

”several primary and secondary disorders” that we have listed in the previous paragraphs.

We now list all the specific disorders focused on in the Methods (lines 96–99). Now

it reads as follows: ”The following primary or secondary disorders associated with tall

stature were selected for analyses: KS (boys; ICD-10 codes Q98.0, Q98.1, Q98.4), XYY

(boys; Q98.5), triple X (girls; Q97.0), FXS (Q99.2), MFS (Q87.4), COS (Beckwith–

Wiedemann Q87.30, Sotos Q87.31, other Q87.38), CAH (E25.00, E25.01), hyperthyroidism

(E05.0–E05.2), and CPP (E22.80 and E30.1). Idiopathic stall stature (ITS; familial or

constitutional and non-familial: E34.40) was also included.”

The discussion section is overly long and could benefit from summarization. The authors could

prioritize key findings at the beginning, dedicating more space to discussing them in relation to

existing literature. Less significant findings can follow, discussed in a more concise manner.

AU: Thank you for the suggestion. The discussion is now considerably shorter and rewritten

accordingly. We hope that it is now more readable and concise.

When comparing this manuscript's results with those from other studies, provide more context

about those studies (e.g., location, study period, etc.), so that the reader can assess how comparable

the results are.

AU: Thank you for your comment. We have now added more context to the referred studies

in the discussion section.

Reviewer #2:

Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

I believe the manuscript is technically sound and the data support the conclusions because of the

following:

- The problem, study aim, and possible benefits from this research is well defined and stated in the

introduction section.

- Results support the suggestion that during early childhood, growth screening should take place

among patients with MFS and congenital overgrowth syndromes, with the addition of KS and CPP

in later years.

AU: Thank you for the positive feedback.

Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

- Aalen Johansen cumulative incidence function is appropriate. However, it is important explain

why the presentation of age groups in table 1 and 2 is important. Please explain the rationality

behind age categories and why it is different for table 1 and 2.

AU: In Table 1, the age groups 0, 2, 6, 10, 14, and 18 years are selected due to their clinical

representativeness based on the biology of growth and are also common growth check-up

points in Finnish health care. The regulation of linear growth in infancy (from 0 to 2 years)

switches to the childhood growth phase which is ongoing at 6 years (preschool age). The age

points 0, 2, and 6 years provide insight into the timely diagnosis of primary conditions.

Thereafter, at 10 and 14 years (the school health care checks), the acquired conditions are

increasing. The final age point, 18 years, gives us a rough estimate of the cumulative

incidence of the disorder near adulthood. We have now added information on the selection

of age points in the subtitle of Table 1.

Precocious puberty is presented separately in Table 2 for technical reasons because

the relevant age points differ from those used in Table 1. By definition, puberty is precocious

if it is observed before age 8 in girls and before age 9 in boys. Therefore, these age points

are used in Table 2. Data on the definition is now included in the title of Table 2.

- I don't see the graphs of the functions in the manuscript although I see title for Figure 1 and 2. I

believe it may be technical problem.

AU: We are sorry that you were unable to see the figures since we believe they are very

demonstrative when comparing different disorders and sexes. We had, however, uploaded

the figures in the required format. The version of the submission we received from the

submission system displayed the figures correctly, so we had no reason to believe that there

could be (technical) problems with them.

Overall, this is an interesting research. Please update the methods and results section acccordingly.

AU: Thank you. We have now updated the methods and result section as suggested

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.pdf

pone.0321798.s002.pdf (173.2KB, pdf)

Decision Letter 1

Heather Macdonald

2 Feb 2025

PONE-D-24-32281R1Epidemiology of disorders associated with tall stature in childhood: a 20-year birth cohort studyPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Harju,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

==============================Please note that I did not review the first version of this manuscript, and was invited to be the academic editor when the first AE was no longer available. Thank you for addressing the reviewers' comments. Please see below for my comments on the revised manuscript. ==============================

Please submit your revised manuscript by Mar 19 2025 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org . When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols .

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Heather Macdonald, Ph.D

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

Additional Editor Comments:

Please note that I did not review the first version of this manuscript and was invited to be the academic editor when the first AE was no longer available. The authors addressed the comments from both reviewers; however, I have some additional comments for consideration.

1. The authors mention in the statistical analysis section that they gathered information on medication purchase - what was the rationale for this, and why was this not included as a study objective? If it is just for descriptive purposes, please clarify in the text (earlier in the methods section - and include the same reference as in the 2022 paper if relevant). Also, results are provided for medications but this is not mentioned in the discussion.

2. Given the 20 year study period, did the authors investigate whether results differed by time - perhaps in 5-year increments or is this not relevant?

3. Regarding the national health registers, I don't have experience with these so am wondering if there is any instance where there would be discrepancies between registers? Or are individuals only in one register?

4. Is there a reference for the Aalen-Johnson estimator? I assume this estimator generates the 95% confidence intervals for the estimates? Please clarify this in the text.

5. Overall, I found that the text in the results section repeats the information in the Tables. Consider revising so the text highlights key findings without reiterating exact values that are presented in the tables. The 95% confidence intervals should be in the tables. I would also suggest including the interquartile range for the median age at diagnosis.

6. The references need reformatting to conform to PLOS One guidelines (e.g., in reference 4, "[Internet]" is not needed and neither is "Available from". The doi should be in the format: doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2013-304830 - please check formatting of all references.

7. The 2022 study of this same cohort should be mentioned earlier in the paper than the discussion. In particular, it should be cited in the methods section especially since the approach was similar between studies. I note that the 2022 paper included a hypothesis whereas this paper does not. In addition, the 2022 paper mentions that 92% of children in the study population were of Finnish background - this should be included in the current paper as well. Similarly, the 2022 paper notes that data on growth measurements were not available.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: (No Response)

Reviewer #2: The manuscript is in much better shape and ready for publication. Comments have been addressed as well.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy .

Reviewer #1: Yes:  Caroline Zani Rodrigues

Reviewer #2: Yes:  Shaminul Shakib

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/ . PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org . Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2025 Apr 15;20(4):e0321798. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0321798.r005

Author response to Decision Letter 2


10 Mar 2025

Additional Editor Comments:

1. The authors mention in the statistical analysis section that they gathered information on medication purchase - what was the rationale for this, and why was this not included as a study objective? If it is just for descriptive purposes, please clarify in the text (earlier in the methods section - and include the same reference as in the 2022 paper if relevant). Also, results are provided for medications but this is not mentioned in the discussion.

AU: Thank you for pointing this out. As you thought, the information on medication purchases is mostly for descriptive purposes, and thus, we did not consider it as our study objective.

We have now clarified the text in the method section as follows: “We also checked the purchases of medications used regularly for KS (testosterone, ATC code G03BA03), CPP (leuprorelin, L02AE02), and hyperthyroidism (antithyroid preparations, H03B) to get a crude estimate of the number of children using the specific medication.”

We also have some discussion on medication purchases (Manuscript lines 230–231, 272–274, and 287–290).

2. Given the 20 year study period, did the authors investigate whether results differed by time - perhaps in 5-year increments or is this not relevant?

AU: We thought about this during the early phase of the study. We also calculated incidence rates and incidence rate ratios of two different birth cohorts (e.g. birth year 1998–2007 versus birth year 2008–2017) with varying times of follow-up (e.g. from birth until the maximum of 4 years). The results revealed slightly more diagnoses of Marfan syndrome and congenital overgrowth syndromes in girls between different birth cohorts, but otherwise we did not find any significant differences. We decided not to include these results in the final paper. Although the study cohort of 1.14 million children is large, the number of diagnosed children is small due to the fact that these conditions are relatively rare. Further separation of boys and girls and comparison between different birth cohorts make the number of diagnosed children even smaller. Consequently, the cumulative incidence function from birth until the maximum of 18 years is statistically the most appropriate way to express the results.

On behalf of the Academic Editor, we received the message from the PLOS One Publications Assistant that we could disregard Comment #2. However, we decided not to remove the answer because we had already written it.

3. Regarding the national health registers, I don't have experience with these so am wondering if there is any instance where there would be discrepancies between registers? Or are individuals only in one register?

AU: Thank you for this interesting question. The national health registers used in the present study to search diagnoses were the Medical Birth Register (MBR) and the Care Register for Health Care (CRHC). The MBR forms the basis of the study because it includes all children born in Finland and their diagnoses during the first week of life. Since the exact time of diagnosis during the first week of life is not reported, we decided to set it as 0 years. After the first week of life, diagnostic data are recorded only in the CRHC. However, the CRHC also includes the diagnoses made during the first week of life, but there may be minor discrepancies in the time of diagnosis between the MBR and CRHC. This is mainly for technical reasons.

The CRHC also includes diagnoses of children who are not born in Finland. They were not included in the study because of the absence of diagnostic information at birth.

4. Is there a reference for the Aalen-Johnson estimator? I assume this estimator generates the 95% confidence intervals for the estimates? Please clarify this in the text.

AU: We now offer a reference concerning the Aalen-Johansen estimator (Coemans M, Verbeke G, Döhler B, Süsal C, Naesens M. Bias by censoring for competing events in survival analysis. BMJ. 2022 Sep 13;378:e071349. doi: 10.1136/bmj-2022-071349. PMID: 36100269).

Aalen-Johansen method estimates the cumulative incidence of the event of interest (accounting for competing events), and results are provided with the 95% confidence intervals. We have added 95% confidence intervals in Table 1 and Table 2.

5. Overall, I found that the text in the results section repeats the information in the Tables. Consider revising so the text highlights key findings without reiterating exact values that are presented in the tables. The 95% confidence intervals should be in the tables. I would also suggest including the interquartile range for the median age at diagnosis.

AU: Thank you for the comment. We have revised the results section accordingly. The 95% confidence intervals and interquartile ranges (from the 25th to 75th percentiles) have been added in Table 1 and Table 2.

6. The references need reformatting to conform to PLOS One guidelines (e.g., in reference 4, "[Internet]" is not needed and neither is "Available from". The doi should be in the format: doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2013-304830 - please check formatting of all references.

AU: References are now formatted according to PLOS One guidelines.

7. The 2022 study of this same cohort should be mentioned earlier in the paper than the discussion. In particular, it should be cited in the methods section especially since the approach was similar between studies. I note that the 2022 paper included a hypothesis whereas this paper does not. In addition, the 2022 paper mentions that 92% of children in the study population were of Finnish background - this should be included in the current paper as well. Similarly, the 2022 paper notes that data on growth measurements were not available.

AU: Thank you for the comments. We have made the revisions as suggested.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response_to_Reviewers_auresp_2.pdf

pone.0321798.s003.pdf (86.8KB, pdf)

Decision Letter 2

Heather Macdonald

12 Mar 2025

Epidemiology of disorders associated with tall stature in childhood: a 20-year birth cohort study

PONE-D-24-32281R2

Dear Dr. Harju,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager®  and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. If you have any questions relating to publication charges, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Heather Macdonald, Ph.D

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Thank you for addressing my comments.

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Heather Macdonald

PONE-D-24-32281R2

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Harju,

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team.

At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following:

* All references, tables, and figures are properly cited

* All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission,

* There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset

If revisions are needed, the production department will contact you directly to resolve them. If no revisions are needed, you will receive an email when the publication date has been set. At this time, we do not offer pre-publication proofs to authors during production of the accepted work. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few weeks to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps.

Lastly, if your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Heather Macdonald

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Table. Congenital malformation syndromes involving early overgrowth: specific name and frequencies during the follow-up.

    (PDF)

    pone.0321798.s001.pdf (62.4KB, pdf)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.pdf

    pone.0321798.s002.pdf (173.2KB, pdf)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response_to_Reviewers_auresp_2.pdf

    pone.0321798.s003.pdf (86.8KB, pdf)

    Data Availability Statement

    The health data used in the study arise from the nationwide registers. The individual-level health data that support the findings of this study are neither publicly available nor to be shared because they contain potentially identifying and sensitive patient information. However, other researchers can request similar register data from the Finnish Social and Health Data Permit Authority (Findata; https://findata.fi/en).


    Articles from PLOS One are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES