Association between birthweight and later body mass index: an individual-based pooled analysis of 27 twin cohorts participating in the CODATwins project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: There is evidence that birthweight is positively associated with body mass index (BMI) in later life, but it remains unclear whether this is explained by genetic factors or the intrauterine environment. We analysed the association between birthweight and BMI from infancy to adulthood within twin pairs, which provides insights into the role of genetic and environmental individual-specific factors. Methods: This study is based on the data from 27 twin cohorts in 17 countries. The pooled data included 78 642 twin individuals (20 635 monozygotic and 18 686 same-sex dizygotic twin pairs) with information on birthweight and a total of 214 930 BMI measurements at ages ranging from 1 to 49 years. The association between birthweight and BMI was analysed at both the individual and within-pair levels using linear regression analyses. Results: At the individual level, a 1-kg increase in birthweight was linearly associated with up to 0.9 kg/m2 higher BMI (P < 0.001). Within twin pairs, regression coefficients were generally greater (up to 1.2 kg/m2 per kg birthweight, P < 0.001) than those from the individual-level analyses. Intra-pair associations between birthweight and later BMI were similar in both zygosity groups and sexes and were lower in adulthood. Conclusions: These findings indicate that environmental factors unique to each individual have an important role in the positive association between birthweight and later BMI, at least until young adulthood.
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 | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".