MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801299971 · doi:10.1186/s12916-018-1189-1

Gestational weight gain charts for different body mass index groups for women in Europe, North America, and Oceania

2018· article· en· W2801299971 on OpenAlex
Susana Santos, Iris Eekhout, Ellis Voerman, Romy Gaillard, Henrique Barros, Marie‐Aline Charles, Leda Chatzi, Cécile Chevrier, George P. Chrousos, Eva Corpeleijn, Nathalie Costet, Sarah Crozier, Myriam Doyon, Merete Eggesbø, Maria Pia Fantini, Sara Farchi, Francesco Forastiere, Luigi Gagliardi, Vagelis Georgiu, Keith M. Godfrey, Davide Gori, Veit Grote, Wojciech Hanke, Irva Hertz‐Picciotto, Barbara Heude, Marie‐France Hivert, Daniel Hryhorczuk, Rae‐Chi Huang, Hazel Inskip, Todd A. Jusko, Anne M. Karvonen, Berthold Koletzko, Leanne K. Küpers, Hanna Lagström, Debbie A. Lawlor, Irina Lehmann, María-José López-Espinosa, Per Magnus, Renata Majewska, Johanna Mäkelä, Yannis Μanios, Sheila McDonald, Monique Mommers, Camilla S. Morgen, George Moschonis, Ľubica Palkovičová, John P. Newnham, Ellen A. Nøhr, Anne‐Marie Nybo Andersen, Emily Oken, Adriëtte J. J. M. Oostvogels, Agnieszka Pac, Eleni Papadopoulou, Juha Pekkanen, Costanza Pizzi, Kinga Polańska, Daniela Porta, Lorenzo Richiardi, Sheryl L. Rifas‐Shiman, Nel Roeleveld, Loreto Santa‐Marina, Ana Cristina Santos, Henriëtte A. Smit, Thorkild I. A. Sørensen, Marie Standl, Maggie A. Stanislawski, Camilla Stoltenberg, Elisabeth Thiering, Carel Thijs, Maties Torrent, Suzanne Tough, T. Trnovec, Marleen M. H. J. van Gelder, Lenie van Rossem, Andrea von Berg, Martine Vrijheid, Tanja G. M. Vrijkotte, Олександр Звінчук, Stef van Buuren, Vincent W. V. Jaddoe

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Medicine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNational Institute of Environmental Health SciencesNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Cancer InstituteLeibniz-GemeinschaftNational Institutes of HealthH. Lundbeck A/SRijksuniversiteit GroningenMutuelle Générale de l'Education NationaleFogarty International CenterCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversidade do PortoAgence Nationale de Sécurité Sanitaire de l’Alimentation, de l’Environnement et du TravailFondation pour la Recherche MédicaleBundesministerium für Bildung, Wissenschaft, Forschung und TechnologieAugustinus FondenUniversitair Medisch Centrum GroningenErasmus Universiteit RotterdamEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentFundação para a Ciência e a TecnologiaZonMwLundbeckfondenInstitut National de la Santé et de la Recherche MédicaleEuropean CommissionUniversité Paris-SudSundhed og Sygdom, Det Frie ForskningsrådNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeBritish Heart FoundationCenters for Disease Control and PreventionNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekCHIST-ERAEgmont FondenAgence Nationale de la RechercheWellcome TrustU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyMedical Research CouncilDiabète QuébecMarch of Dimes FoundationNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
KeywordsMedicineBody mass indexWeight gainObstetricsIndex (typography)GestationDemographyBody weightPregnancyGerontologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Gestational weight gain differs according to pre-pregnancy body mass index and is related to the risks of adverse maternal and child health outcomes. Gestational weight gain charts for women in different pre-pregnancy body mass index groups enable identification of women and offspring at risk for adverse health outcomes. We aimed to construct gestational weight gain reference charts for underweight, normal weight, overweight, and grades 1, 2 and 3 obese women and to compare these charts with those obtained in women with uncomplicated term pregnancies. METHODS: We used individual participant data from 218,216 pregnant women participating in 33 cohorts from Europe, North America, and Oceania. Of these women, 9065 (4.2%), 148,697 (68.1%), 42,678 (19.6%), 13,084 (6.0%), 3597 (1.6%), and 1095 (0.5%) were underweight, normal weight, overweight, and grades 1, 2, and 3 obese women, respectively. A total of 138, 517 women from 26 cohorts had pregnancies with no hypertensive or diabetic disorders and with term deliveries of appropriate for gestational age at birth infants. Gestational weight gain charts for underweight, normal weight, overweight, and grade 1, 2, and 3 obese women were derived by the Box-Cox t method using the generalized additive model for location, scale, and shape. RESULTS: We observed that gestational weight gain strongly differed per maternal pre-pregnancy body mass index group. The median (interquartile range) gestational weight gain at 40 weeks was 14.2 kg (11.4-17.4) for underweight women, 14.5 kg (11.5-17.7) for normal weight women, 13.9 kg (10.1-17.9) for overweight women, and 11.2 kg (7.0-15.7), 8.7 kg (4.3-13.4) and 6.3 kg (1.9-11.1) for grades 1, 2, and 3 obese women, respectively. The rate of weight gain was lower in the first half than in the second half of pregnancy. No differences in the patterns of weight gain were observed between cohorts or countries. Similar weight gain patterns were observed in mothers without pregnancy complications. CONCLUSIONS: Gestational weight gain patterns are strongly related to pre-pregnancy body mass index. The derived charts can be used to assess gestational weight gain in etiological research and as a monitoring tool for weight gain during pregnancy in clinical practice.

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.

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 score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.457

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.269 · 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