MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3084800304 · doi:10.1249/mss.0000000000002510

Elite Athletes and Pregnancy Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2020· review· en· W3084800304 on OpenAlex
Jenna B. Wowdzia, Tara-Leigh McHugh, Jane S Thornton, Allison Sivak, Michelle F. Mottola, Margie H. Davenport

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy-related medical research
Canadian institutionsChildren’s Health Research InstituteFowler Kennedy Sport Medicine ClinicWestern UniversityWomen and Children’s Health Research InstituteUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOdds ratioPregnancyObstetricsWeight gainPopulationConfidence intervalAnxietyLow birth weightPhysical therapyGynecologyInternal medicinePsychiatryBody weight

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate fetal and maternal pregnancy outcomes of elite athletes who had participated in competitive sport immediately before conception. METHODS: Online databases were searched up to March 24, 2020. Studies of any design and language were eligible if they contained information on the relevant population (pregnant women), exposure (engaged in elite sport immediately before pregnancy), and outcomes (birth weight, low birth weight, macrosomia, preterm birth, fetal heart rate and pulse index, cesarean sections, instrumental deliveries, episiotomies, duration of labor, perineal tears, pregnancy-induced low back pain, pelvic girdle pain, urinary incontinence, miscarriages, prenatal weight gain, inadequate/excess prenatal weight gain, maternal depression or anxiety). RESULTS: Eleven unique studies (n = 2256 women) were included. We identified "low" certainty evidence demonstrating lower rates of low back pain in elite athletes compared with active/sedentary controls (n = 248; odds ratio, 0.38; 95% confidence interval, 0.20-0.73; I2 = 0%) and "very low" certainty evidence indicating an increased odds of excessive prenatal weight gain in elite athletes versus active/sedentary controls (n = 1763; odds ratio, 2.47; 95% confidence interval, 1.26-4.85; I2 = 0%). Low certainty evidence from two studies (n = 7) indicated three episodes of fetal bradycardia after high-intensity exercise that resolved within 10 min of cessation of activity. No studies reported inadequate gestational weight gain or maternal depression or anxiety. There were no differences between elite athletes and controls for all other outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: There is "low" certainty of evidence that elite athletes have reduced odds of experiencing pregnancy-related low back pain and "very low"certainty of evidence that elite athletes have increased the odds of excessive weight gain compared with active/sedentary controls. More research is needed to provide strong evidence of how elite competitive sport before pregnancy affects maternal and fetal outcomes.PROSPERO Registration: CRD42020167382.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.459
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0220.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.009
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.312 · 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