Dietary intake, weight gain, and birth outcomes of physically active pregnant women: a pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pregnant women have increased energy and nutrient needs. Exercise also increases energy and glucose demands. This pilot study examined whether women who were physically active during pregnancy met their dietary needs, gained weight adequately, avoided hypoglycemia, and had normal birth outcomes. Based on a convenience sample, 11 active women were studied from 18 weeks gestation to delivery. They exercised for 40 min at 70% VO2 peak, 3-4 times per week. Weekly measures included capillary blood glucose concentrations, body mass, and food records. Birth outcome measures included baby mass, length, and activity, pulse, grimace, appearance, and respiration (APGAR) scores. Our findings suggest that these subjects had lower average energy intake (8680 +/- 490 kJ/d) than recommended for the 2nd and 3rd trimesters (13,020 +/-185 kJ/d; 13,480 +/- 185 kJ/d, respectively, p < 0.0001). Protein requirements for pregnancy were exceeded. Average intakes of iron (19 +/- 2 mg/d) and folate (356 +/- 33 microg/d) were lower than Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDAs) (27 mg/d and 600 microg/d, respectively) and milk products consumed were less than the recommended daily servings. Four women gained less weight per week than recommended for pregnancy. No hypoglycemia occurred post-exercise. Birth outcome measures were within normal ranges. Comparative studies with a larger number of subjects are required to determine if active pregnant women have adequate nutrient intakes and weight gain.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".