Redefining pediatric metabolic syndrome: Toward precision, puberty-adjusted, and globally scalable diagnostic criteria

Soliman, Ashraf T and Hamed, Noor and Alyafei, Fawzia and Alaaraj, Nada M and Ahmed, Shayma M and AlHumaidi, Noora S and Elawwa, Ahmed S (2025) Redefining pediatric metabolic syndrome: Toward precision, puberty-adjusted, and globally scalable diagnostic criteria. GSC Advanced Research and Reviews, 23 (1). pp. 124-139. ISSN 2582-4597

Background: The diagnosis of metabolic syndrome (MetS) in children and adolescents has been historically derived from adult-based definitions, despite significant physiological differences during growth and puberty. The lack of pediatric-specific, developmentally sensitive criteria has resulted in inconsistent prevalence estimates, poor cross-study comparability, and limited clinical utility. This review aims to critically examine historical and emerging approaches to MetS diagnosis in pediatrics, highlighting challenges, innovations, and the need for global consensus. Methods: A structured narrative review methodology was employed. Relevant literature from 2000 to 2025 was retrieved from PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science using terms such as “pediatric metabolic syndrome,” “childhood MetS definitions,” “z-score metabolic risk,” and “continuous MetS score.” Studies comparing diagnostic criteria, proposing novel tools, or evaluating prevalence variability in children were prioritized. Data were synthesized into comparative tables and thematically categorized into traditional, modified, and emerging diagnostic models. Results: Historical definitions, including those by Cook et al., de Ferranti et al., and the IDF, rely on binary thresholds for central obesity, triglycerides, HDL cholesterol, blood pressure, and fasting glucose. These models show wide variability in prevalence within the same populations (e.g., 0.4%–74.4%) depending on the criteria used. Limitations of these binary systems include failure to account for pubertal stage, age, and sex differences, as well as insensitivity to subclinical metabolic risk. Recent advances include continuous MetS scores (cMetS), z–score–based models, and salivary biomarkers and physical fitness indicators (e.g., cardiorespiratory fitness, handgrip strength). These approaches allow nuanced, individualized risk tracking and are better aligned with developmental physiology. However, they face barriers to clinical implementation due to complexity and limited validation across diverse populations. Conclusion: This review highlights the urgent need for globally scalable, age-, sex-, and puberty-adjusted definitions of pediatric MetS. The integration of machine learning, personalized risk profiling, and longitudinal metabolic tracking offers promise for precision prevention. Yet, progress depends on international collaboration, standardized validation efforts, and consensus guidelines. Early and accurate diagnosis is essential to guide preventive strategies and reduce the lifelong burden of cardiometabolic disease.