The Effect of Supervised Prenatal Exercise on Fetal Growth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the influence of structured prenatal exercise on newborn birth weight, macrosomia, and growth restriction. DATA SOURCES: A structured search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Sport Discus, Ovid's All EBM Reviews, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases up to January 13, 2015. The search combined keywords and MeSH-like terms including, but not limited, to "physical activity," "exercise," "pregnancy," "gestation," "neonatal," and "randomized controlled trial." METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Articles reporting randomized controlled trials comparing standard care with standard care plus supervised prenatal exercise for which birth size was available were included. Supervision was defined as at least one exercise session performed with study personnel every 2 weeks throughout the program. Interventions consisting solely of pelvic floor exercises, stretching, or relaxation were excluded. Our search yielded 1,036 publications of which 79 were assessed for eligibility. Twenty-eight studies reporting on 5,322 pregnancies were subsequently included in the analysis. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Our meta-analysis demonstrated that prenatal exercise reduced the odds of having a large newborn (birth weight greater than 4,000 g or greater than the 90th percentile for gestational age and sex) by 31% (odds ratio [OR] 0.69, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55-0.86; I 25%) without altering the risk of having a small newborn (birth weight less than 2,500 g or less than the 10th percentile for gestational age and sex) (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.72-1.46; I 0%) or gestational age at delivery (weighted mean difference -0.00 weeks, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.09; I 0%). Newborns of mothers assigned to exercise were lighter than those of nonexercising controls (weighted mean difference -31 g, 95% CI -57 to -4; I 0%). Maternal gestational weight gain (weighted mean difference -1.1 kg, 95% CI -1.5 to -0.6; I 53%) and odds of cesarean delivery (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.69-0.94; I 0%) were also reduced. CONCLUSION: These data demonstrate that structured prenatal exercise reduces the risk of having a large newborn without a change in the risk of having a small newborn.
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 | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".