Table 1 Characteristics of studies included in review

Arnaiz et al. 2010 [35]

Chile

Schools (103)

56

46.6

6−16

Ultrasonography; measurement location not reported; automated edge detection. Number of measurements not reported.

Böhm et al. 2009 [16]

Germany

Schools (267)

11.6

53.6

6−17

Ultrasonography; measurement proximal to carotid artery bifurcation; automated edge detection. Mean of 11 measurements used for analysis.

Casariu et al. 2011 [17]

Romania

Schools (100)

50

58.0

6−18

Ultrasonography; measurement at the common carotid artery near the bifurcation, during end diastole. Maximal thicknesses of the intima-media width measured to give three readings and the mean value was used for analysis.

Caserta et al. 2010 [18]

Italy

Primary schools (575)

31.1

49.9

11−13

Ultrasonography; measurement of far wall at 3 locations below bifurcation. Mean of these measurements used for analysis.

Croymans et al. 2010 [29]

United States

High schools (249)

15 % had BMI centile > 95th

67.5

15−18

Ultrasonography; images of the far wall of the common carotid artery taken from multiple angles; automated edge detection. Mean of these measurements used for analysis.

Dawson et al. 2009 [30]

United States

Offspring of population-based cohort (228 aged < 18)

NR

44.3

11−17

Ultrasonography; near and far wall of the left and right internal, bifurcation and common carotid arteries imaged at three angles; automated edge detection. The mean across angles used to obtain location-specific means; the average of these 12 measures used for analysis.

Doyon et al. 2013 [19]

Turkey, Germany, Sweden, Poland

Nonobese, nonhypertensive children (1,051)

Nonobese sample

53.2

6−18

Ultrasonography; cIMT was obtained either by 5 averaged measurements on each common carotid artery or semiautomatically using a digital image evaluation software, depending on the availability of the software package at each centre.

Elkiran 2013 [33]

Turkey

Schools (123)

74.0

54.5

11−15

Ultrasonography; measurement of left common carotid artery. Number of measurements not reported.

Geerts 2012 [20]

Netherlands

Population-based birth cohort (306)

NR

55.5

5

Ultrasonography (high resolution echo-tracking); measurement of right common carotid artery. Measurement repeated a maximum of four times.

Jourdan et al. 2005 [21]

Germany and Poland

Schools (247)

NR

51.4

10−20

Ultrasonography; far wall measured manually using the calliper method.

Kollias et al. 2013 [22]

Greece

Schools (448)

28.1 % overweight, 12.7 % obese

52.9

10−18

Ultrasonography; bilateral measurements at the point of maximum thickness on the far wall along a 1 cm section of each common carotid artery proximal to the carotid bulb; measurement using electronic calipers. Mean of 3–4 measurements for each side used for analysis.

Lamotte et al. 2013 [23]

France

Schools (319)

13.5 % overweight 3.4 % obese

57.7 %

12.5−17.5

Ultrasonography; bilateral assessment along 10 mm segment of common carotid arteries, ≥5 mm from the bifurcation; one hundred measurements on average on the far wall on each side; automated. Mean value of left and right measures used for analysis.

Lim et al. 2009 [37]

South Korea

High school (285)

13.3

48.4

14−17

Ultrasonography; bilateral measurements of near and far walls of common carotid arteries; Automated edge-detection. Maximum IMT value determined for each side and the average used for analysis.

Melo et al. 2014 [24]

Portugal

Schools (385)

28.3

50.9

11−13

Ultrasonography; measurement on far wall of right common carotid artery; Automated edge-detection. Number of measurements not reported.

Mittelman et al. 2010 [31]

United States

Schools and universities (599)

32.7

51.3

6−20

Ultrasonography; measurement on far walls of left common carotid artery 1 cm proximal to the bifurcation during 3 complete separate cardiac cycles; Automated edge-detection. Average reading of all 3 systolic and 3 diastolic frames used for analyses.

Osiniri et al. [25] 2012

Spain

Well child visits at primary care centres (135)

NR

53.3

NR, mean 7.1 ± 1.1

Ultrasonography; diastolic images obtained from far wall of the distal common carotid artery 1 cm from bifurcation. Averages of 5 measurements used for analyses.

Ozguven et al. 2010 [34]

Turkey

Schools (142)

49.3

55.6

13−18

Ultrasonography; measurement on far wall of left common carotid artery. Mean of at least four measurements taken ~10 mm proximal to bifurcation used for analyses.

Pandit et al. 2014 [36]

India

Private schools; routine health checks (250)

71.2

NR

6−17

Ultrasonography (echo-tracking); measurement at right common carotid artery; Automated edge-detection. Number of measurements not reported.

Sass et al. 1998 [26]

France

Population-based cohort (193)

NR

56.0

10−24 (mean 15.5)

Ultrasonography; bilateral measurement on ≥1 cm segment of carotid arteries at 3 cm proximal to the bifurcation. Average of 25–50 readings per measurement, with two measurements obtained per segment. Average of right and left measurements used for analysis.

Urbina et al. 2009 [32]

United States

318

43.4

62.3

10−24 (mean age 17.8)

Ultrasonography; bilateral measurements of three segments of carotid arteries. Trace technique to measure maximum thickness on right and left sides, and averaged for the common carotid artery, the bifurcation (carotid bulb), and the internal carotid artery.

Weghuber et al. 2013 [27]

Austria

Residents of Graz and Styria (104 subsample)

46.2

56.7

4−18

Ultrasonography; bilateral measurements of the bulbous near common carotid arteries. Maximal IMT recorded at each of the vessel segments and averaged for each side.

Whincup et al. 2012 [28]

United Kingdom

Primary schools (939)

NR

53

NR, mean 10.8 ± 0.4

Ultrasonography; bilateral measurement on far walls of common carotid arteries proximal to the carotid bifurcation. Three end-diastolic frames selected and analyzed for mean cIMT on each side. Mean of left- and right-sided readings used for analysis.