Experiences regarding nutrition and exercise among women during early postpartum: a qualitative grounded theory study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Excess gestational weight gain has long- and short-term implications for women and children, and postpartum weight retention is associated with an increased risk of long-term obesity. Despite the existence of dietary and exercise guidelines, many women struggle to return to pre-pregnancy weight. Experiences of women in tackling postpartum weight loss are poorly understood. We undertook this study to explore experiences related to nutrition, exercise and weight in the postpartum in women in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: This was a nested qualitative study within The Be Healthy in Pregnancy Study, a randomized controlled trial. Women randomized to the control group were invited to participate. Semi-structured focus groups were conducted at 4-6 months postpartum. Focus groups were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, coded and analyzed thematically using a constructivist grounded theory approach. RESULTS: Women experienced a complex relationship with their body image, due to unrealistic expectations related to their postpartum body. Participants identified barriers and enablers to healthy habits during pregnancy and postpartum. Gestational weight gain guidelines were regarded as unhelpful and unrealistic. A lack of guidance and information about weight management, healthy eating, and exercise in the postpartum period was highlighted. CONCLUSION: Strategies for weight management that target the unique characteristics of the postpartum period have been neglected in research and in patient counselling. Postpartum women may begin preparing for their next pregnancy and support during this period could improve their health for subsequent pregnancies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01689961 registered September 21, 2012.
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 | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".