Psychological factors and trimester-specific gestational weight gain: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Excess gestational weight gain (GWG), which has reached epidemic proportions, is associated with numerous adverse pregnancy outcomes. Early pregnancy provides a unique opportunity for counseling pregnant women since many women are motivated to engage in healthy behaviors. A systematic review was conducted to summarize the relation between psychological factors and trimester-specific GWG, i.e. GWG measured at the end of each trimester. Eight databases were searched for affect, cognition and personality factors. The guidelines on meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology were followed. The methodological quality of each study was assessed using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Of 3620 non-duplicate titles and abstracts, 74 articles underwent full-text review. Two cohort studies met the inclusion criteria. Distress was negatively associated with first trimester GWG among both adolescents and non-adolescents. Body image dissatisfaction was associated with second trimester GWG only among non-adolescents. No association emerged between perceived stress, state and trait anxiety and body image dissatisfaction among adolescents and trimester-specific GWG. The relation between trimester-specific GWG and a number of weight-related and dietary-related cognitions, affective states and personality traits remain unexplored. Given the limited number of studies, further high-quality evidence is required to examine the association between psychological factors and trimester-specific GWG, especially for cognitive and personality factors.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".