Relationships between Objectively Measured Sedentary Behavior during Pregnancy and Infant Birthweight
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although numerous studies have assessed physical activity during pregnancy and relationships with infant outcomes, such as birthweight, few have evaluated sedentary behavior. Our objective was to evaluate sedentary behavior across pregnancy and relationships with infant birthweight in a sociodemographically diverse sample. METHODS: We measured device-assessed sedentary behavior and physical activity over three days at 16-18, 24-26, and 32-34 weeks gestation and infant birthweight from medical records among 71 participants. We used linear regression to assess relationships between sedentary behavior at each evaluation period with birthweight-for-gestational age Z-scores (BW-for-GA). RESULTS: = 0.021). Low and high levels of sedentary behavior predicted lower BW-for-GA. Multivariate models suggested that this relationship was independent of physical activity levels. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the high levels of sedentary behavior during pregnancy observed in many studies, even modest associations with birthweight merit further consideration. Relationships might not be evident later in pregnancy or if only linear relationships are considered. More detailed studies could help guide recommendations on sedentary behavior during pregnancy and the development of more comprehensive interventions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".