Maternal body mass index, gestational weight gain, and the risk of overweight and obesity across childhood: An individual participant data meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Maternal obesity and excessive gestational weight gain may have persistent effects on offspring fat development. However, it remains unclear whether these effects differ by severity of obesity, and whether these effects are restricted to the extremes of maternal body mass index (BMI) and gestational weight gain. We aimed to assess the separate and combined associations of maternal BMI and gestational weight gain with the risk of overweight/obesity throughout childhood, and their population impact. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted an individual participant data meta-analysis of data from 162,129 mothers and their children from 37 pregnancy and birth cohort studies from Europe, North America, and Australia. We assessed the individual and combined associations of maternal pre-pregnancy BMI and gestational weight gain, both in clinical categories and across their full ranges, with the risks of overweight/obesity in early (2.0-5.0 years), mid (5.0-10.0 years) and late childhood (10.0-18.0 years), using multilevel binary logistic regression models with a random intercept at cohort level adjusted for maternal sociodemographic and lifestyle-related characteristics. We observed that higher maternal pre-pregnancy BMI and gestational weight gain both in clinical categories and across their full ranges were associated with higher risks of childhood overweight/obesity, with the strongest effects in late childhood (odds ratios [ORs] for overweight/obesity in early, mid, and late childhood, respectively: OR 1.66 [95% CI: 1.56, 1.78], OR 1.91 [95% CI: 1.85, 1.98], and OR 2.28 [95% CI: 2.08, 2.50] for maternal overweight; OR 2.43 [95% CI: 2.24, 2.64], OR 3.12 [95% CI: 2.98, 3.27], and OR 4.47 [95% CI: 3.99, 5.23] for maternal obesity; and OR 1.39 [95% CI: 1.30, 1.49], OR 1.55 [95% CI: 1.49, 1.60], and OR 1.72 [95% CI: 1.56, 1.91] for excessive gestational weight gain). The proportions of childhood overweight/obesity prevalence attributable to maternal overweight, maternal obesity, and excessive gestational weight gain ranged from 10.2% to 21.6%. Relative to the effect of maternal BMI, excessive gestational weight gain only slightly increased the risk of childhood overweight/obesity within each clinical BMI category (p-values for interactions of maternal BMI with gestational weight gain: p = 0.038, p < 0.001, and p = 0.637 in early, mid, and late childhood, respectively). Limitations of this study include the self-report of maternal BMI and gestational weight gain for some of the cohorts, and the potential of residual confounding. Also, as this study only included participants from Europe, North America, and Australia, results need to be interpreted with caution with respect to other populations. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, higher maternal pre-pregnancy BMI and gestational weight gain were associated with an increased risk of childhood overweight/obesity, with the strongest effects at later ages. The additional effect of gestational weight gain in women who are overweight or obese before pregnancy is small. Given the large population impact, future intervention trials aiming to reduce the prevalence of childhood overweight and obesity should focus on maternal weight status before pregnancy, in addition to weight gain during pregnancy.
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 | 0.022 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.060 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".