calculated for distributions below and above the median for each of the two indicators.This approach is limited in fitting skewed data,especially at the extreme tails of the distribution,since it only partially adjusts for the skewness inherent in the weight-based indicators.The WHO standards,on the other hand,employed LMS-based methods that fit skewed data adequately and generate fitted curves that follow closely the empirical data.Like the WHO standards,construction of the CDC 2000 growth charts was also based on the LMS method and,therefore,differences between this reference and the WHO standards are largely a reflection of differences in the populations on which the two sets of curves were based. Length/height-for-age.The standard for linear growth has a part based on length (length-for-age,0 to 24 months)and another on height (height-for-age,2 to 5 years).The two parts were constructed using the same model but the final curves reflect the average difference between recumbent length and standing height.By design,children between 18 and 30 months in the cross-sectional component of the MGRS had both length and height measurements taken.The average difference between the two measurements in this set of 1625 children was 0.73 cm.To fit a single model for the whole age range, 0.7 cm was therefore added to the cross-sectional height values before merging them with the longitudinal sample's length data.After the model was fitted,the median curve was shifted back downwards by 0.7 cm for ages above two years,and the coefficient of variation curve adjusted to the new median values to construct the height-for-age growth curves.The same power transformation of age was applied to stretch the age scale for each of the sexes before fitting cubic splines to generate their respective growth curves.The boys'curves required a model with higher degrees of freedom to fit both the median and coefficient of variation curves.The data for both sexes followed the normal distribution Weight-for-age.The weights of the longitudinal and cross-sectional samples were merged without any adjustments and a single model was fitted to generate one continuous set of curves constituting each sex-specific weight-for-age standard.The same power transformation was applied to both boys'and girls'age before fitting the curve construction model.The weight data for both sexes were skewed,so in specifying the model,the parameter related to skewness was fitted in addition to the median and the approximate coefficient of variation.In modelling skewness the girls'curves required more degrees of freedom to fit a curve for this parameter. Weight-for-length/height.The construction of the weight-for-length(45 to 110 cm)and weight-for- height (65 to 120 cm)standards followed a procedure similar to that applied to construct the length/height-for-age standards.That is,to fit a single model,0.7 cm was added to the cross-sectional height values,and after the model was fitted,the weight-for-length centile curves in the length interval 65.7 to 120.7 cm were shifted back by 0.7 cm to derive the weight-for-height standards corresponding to the height range 65 cm to 120 cm.The lower limit of the weight-for-length standards(45 cm)was chosen to cover up to approximately -2 SD girls'length at birth.The upper limit for the weight-for- height standards was influenced by the need to accommodate the tallest children at age 60 months,that is,120 cm is approximately +2 SD boys'height-for-age at 60 months.The overlap between the upper end of the weight-for-length standards and the lower end of the weight-for-height standards is intended to facilitate their application in severely undernourished populations and emergency settings There was no evidence that a length/height transformation similar to that described for age was required for constructing the weight-for-length/height standards.The modelling of the median and variance curves followed the procedure described for the first two standards.Results from the final model for girls'weight-for-length/height suggested the need to investigate potential improvements in the curves by modelling kurtosis.Adjustment for kurtosis,however had a negligible impact on the final centiles.Therefore,considering that modelling the fourth parameter would increase complexity in application of the standards and create inconsistency between the sexes,the final curves were generated without adjusting for kurtosis.The degrees of freedom for the median and variance curves varied between the boys'and girls'standards.The fact that the weight-for-length/height indicator combines different velocities for the two measurements involved (weight and length/height)at xviiixviii calculated for distributions below and above the median for each of the two indicators. This approach is limited in fitting skewed data, especially at the extreme tails of the distribution, since it only partially adjusts for the skewness inherent in the weight-based indicators. The WHO standards, on the other hand, employed LMS-based methods that fit skewed data adequately and generate fitted curves that follow closely the empirical data. Like the WHO standards, construction of the CDC 2000 growth charts was also based on the LMS method and, therefore, differences between this reference and the WHO standards are largely a reflection of differences in the populations on which the two sets of curves were based. Length/height-for-age. The standard for linear growth has a part based on length (length-for-age, 0 to 24 months) and another on height (height-for-age, 2 to 5 years). The two parts were constructed using the same model but the final curves reflect the average difference between recumbent length and standing height. By design, children between 18 and 30 months in the cross-sectional component of the MGRS had both length and height measurements taken. The average difference between the two measurements in this set of 1625 children was 0.73 cm. To fit a single model for the whole age range, 0.7 cm was therefore added to the cross-sectional height values before merging them with the longitudinal sample's length data. After the model was fitted, the median curve was shifted back downwards by 0.7 cm for ages above two years, and the coefficient of variation curve adjusted to the new median values to construct the height-for-age growth curves. The same power transformation of age was applied to stretch the age scale for each of the sexes before fitting cubic splines to generate their respective growth curves. The boys' curves required a model with higher degrees of freedom to fit both the median and coefficient of variation curves. The data for both sexes followed the normal distribution. Weight-for-age. The weights of the longitudinal and cross-sectional samples were merged without any adjustments and a single model was fitted to generate one continuous set of curves constituting each sex-specific weight-for-age standard. The same power transformation was applied to both boys' and girls' age before fitting the curve construction model. The weight data for both sexes were skewed, so in specifying the model, the parameter related to skewness was fitted in addition to the median and the approximate coefficient of variation. In modelling skewness the girls' curves required more degrees of freedom to fit a curve for this parameter. Weight-for-length/height. The construction of the weight-for-length (45 to 110 cm) and weight-forheight (65 to 120 cm) standards followed a procedure similar to that applied to construct the length/height-for-age standards. That is, to fit a single model, 0.7 cm was added to the cross-sectional height values, and after the model was fitted, the weight-for-length centile curves in the length interval 65.7 to 120.7 cm were shifted back by 0.7 cm to derive the weight-for-height standards corresponding to the height range 65 cm to 120 cm. The lower limit of the weight-for-length standards (45 cm) was chosen to cover up to approximately -2 SD girls' length at birth. The upper limit for the weight-forheight standards was influenced by the need to accommodate the tallest children at age 60 months, that is, 120 cm is approximately +2 SD boys' height-for-age at 60 months. The overlap between the upper end of the weight-for-length standards and the lower end of the weight-for-height standards is intended to facilitate their application in severely undernourished populations and emergency settings. There was no evidence that a length/height transformation similar to that described for age was required for constructing the weight-for-length/height standards. The modelling of the median and variance curves followed the procedure described for the first two standards. Results from the final model for girls' weight-for-length/height suggested the need to investigate potential improvements in the curves by modelling kurtosis. Adjustment for kurtosis, however had a negligible impact on the final centiles. Therefore, considering that modelling the fourth parameter would increase complexity in application of the standards and create inconsistency between the sexes, the final curves were generated without adjusting for kurtosis. The degrees of freedom for the median and variance curves varied between the boys' and girls' standards. The fact that the weight-for-length/height indicator combines different velocities for the two measurements involved (weight and length/height) at