MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042945261 · doi:10.1097/aog.0b013e31829a3b86

Timing of Excessive Pregnancy-Related Weight Gain and Offspring Adiposity at Birth

2013· article· en· W2042945261 on OpenAlexafffund
Margie H. Davenport, Stéphanie-May Ruchat, Isabelle Giroux, Maggie M. Sopper, Michelle F. Mottola

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrics and Gynecology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsWomen and Children’s Health Research InstituteWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsWeight gainPregnancyMedicineObstetricsGestationBirth weightOffspringGestational ageCohortBody weightInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether the timing of excessive maternal weight gain in a cohort of women following current guidelines for healthy living during pregnancy affects neonatal adiposity at birth. METHODS: One hundred seventy-two healthy women who were at least 18 years old with body mass indexes (BMIs) of at least 18.5 were recruited between 16 weeks and 20 weeks of gestation. The cohort followed healthy living guidelines during pregnancy and were retrospectively grouped according to 2009 Institute of Medicine guidelines for weight gain in the first and second halves of pregnancy: 1) appropriate gestational weight gain (ie, within Institute of Medicine recommendations) in the first and second halves of pregnancy ("overall appropriate"); 2) appropriate gestational weight gain in the first half of pregnancy and excessive gestational weight gain in the second half of pregnancy ("late excessive"); 3) excessive gestational weight gain in the first half of pregnancy and appropriate gestational weight gain in the second half of pregnancy ("early excessive"); and 4) excessive gestational weight gain throughout pregnancy ("overall excessive"). Primary measures included neonatal weight, length, BMI, and body fat at birth measured 6-18 hours after delivery. Neonatal body fat greater than 14% was considered excessive. RESULTS: Neonates of women who gained excessively in the first half of pregnancy exhibited greater heel-crown length, birth weight, and excessive body fat ("early excessive" 17.5±3.1%, "overall excessive" 18.7±3.3%) compared with those born to women who gained appropriately ("overall appropriate" 13.2±4.1%; "late excessive" 14.7±3.3%; P<.01). Neonates of women who gained excessively in the first half of pregnancy had an increased risk (odds ratio [OR] 2.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.35-5.17) of elevated body fat at birth compared with neonates of women with total excessive weight gain (OR 1.49, 95% CI 0.80-2.79). CONCLUSION: Timing of excessive weight gain is an important factor influencing neonatal morphometrics. Prevention of early excessive weight gain should be encouraged in the period before conception and reinforced early in pregnancy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.344
Threshold uncertainty score0.440

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations96
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetrics and GynecologySame topicGestational Diabetes Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207