Are women with history of pre-eclampsia starting a new pregnancy in good nutritional status in South Africa and Zimbabwe?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Maternal nutritional status before and during pregnancy is an important contributor to pregnancy outcomes and early child health. The aim of this study was to describe the preconceptional nutritional status and dietary intake during pregnancy in high-risk women from South Africa and Zimbabwe. METHODS: This is a prospective observational study, nested to the CAP trial. Anthropometric measurements before and during pregnancy and dietary intake using 24-h recall during pregnancy were assessed. The Intake Distribution Estimation software (PC-SIDE) was used to evaluate nutrient intake adequacy taking the Estimated Average Requirement (EAR) as a cut-off point. RESULTS: Three hundred twelve women who had pre-eclampsia in their last pregnancy and delivered in hospitals from South Africa and Zimbabwe were assessed. 73.7 and 60.2% women in South Africa and Zimbabwe, respectively started their pregnancy with BMI above normal (BMI ≥ 25) whereas the prevalence of underweight was virtually non-existent. The majority of women had inadequate intakes of micronutrients. Considering food and beverage intake only, none of the micronutrients measured achieved the estimated average requirement. Around 60% of pregnant women reported taking folic acid or iron supplements in South Africa, but almost none did so in Zimbabwe. CONCLUSION: We found a high prevalence of overweight and obesity and high micronutrient intake inadequacy in pregnant women who had the previous pregnancy complicated with pre-eclampsia. The obesity figures and micronutrient inadequacy are issues of concern that need to be addressed. Pregnant women have regular contacts with the health system; these opportunities could be used to improve diet and nutrition. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PACTR201105000267371 . Registered 06 December 2010.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".