The impact of parity and maternal obesity on the fetal outcomes of a non-selected Lower Saxony population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Maternal obesity during pregnancy is associated with adverse intrauterine events and fetal outcomes and may increase the risk of obesity and metabolic disease development in offspring. Higher parity, regardless of socioeconomic status, is associated with increased maternal body mass index (BMI). In this study, we examined the relationship between parity, maternal obesity, and fetal outcomes in a large sample of mother-neonate pairs from Lower Saxony, Germany. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study examined pseudonymized data of a non-selected singleton cohort from Lower Saxony's statewide quality assurance initiative. 448,963 cases were included. Newborn outcomes were assessed in relation to maternal BMI and parity. RESULTS: Maternal obesity was associated with an increased risk of placental insufficiency, chorioamnionitis, and fetal distress while giving birth. This effect was present across all parity groups. Fetal presentation did not differ between BMI groups, except for the increased risk of high longitudinal position and shoulder dystocia in obese women. Maternal obesity was also associated with an increased risk of premature birth, low arterial cord blood pH and low 5-min APGAR scores. CONCLUSIONS: Maternal obesity increases the risk of adverse neonatal outcomes. There is a positive correlation between parity and increased maternal BMI. Weight-dependent fetal risk factors increase with parity, while parity-dependent outcomes occur less frequently in multipara. Prevention and intervention programs for women planning to become pregnant can be promising measures to reduce pregnancy and birth complications.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".