MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4213248114 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwab049.176

A177 INADEQUATE OR EXCESSIVE GESTATIONAL WEIGHT GAIN IN INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASE AND IMPACT ON PREGNANCY AND NEONATAL OUTCOMES

2022· article· en· W4213248114 on OpenAlexaff
Diana Nguyen, Parul Tandon, Vivek Govardhanam, Youstina Hanna, J J Tao, Julie Cepo, Cynthia Maxwell, Vivian Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and Medication Impact
Canadian institutionsSinai Health SystemUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePregnancyWeight gainObstetricsUlcerative colitisInflammatory bowel diseaseBody mass indexGestational ageGestational diabetesGestationSmall for gestational ageBirth weightLow birth weightDiseasePediatricsInternal medicineBody weight

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are at a risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. Prior studies have suggested that inadequate gestational weight gain is associated with preterm birth and intrauterine growth restriction. Aims We sought to characterize the proportion of people with IBD who gain inadequate or excessive weight during pregnancy and how this affects pregnancy and neonatal outcomes. Methods Pregnant patients with ulcerative colitis (UC), Crohn’s disease (CD), and inflammatory bowel disease unclassified (IBD-U) were identified retrospectively at Mount Sinai Hospital from 2016 to 2020. Total gestational weight gain (GWG) was calculated as the difference of the weight recorded at time of labor and pre-pregnancy weight. GWG was categorized as inadequate GWG, adequate GWG, and excessive GWG based on the pre-pregnancy body-mass index and standards set by the U.S. Institute of Medicine. Neonatal-related outcomes were also recorded for each patient and included preterm delivery, small for gestational age (SGA) and large for gestational age (LGA). Multiple logistic regression was used to assess the association between gestational weight gain and outcomes while controlling for maternal age, history of gestational diabetes, and preconception disease activity. Results 225 pregnancies were included (106 UC, 115 CD, 4 IBD-U). Forty-eight patients (21.3%) had inadequate, 91 (40.4%) adequate, and 86 (38.2%) excessive GWG. People of East Asian, African, and Hispanic ethnicity were more likely to have inadequate GWG. People with inadequate GWG were more likely than those with excessive GWG to have lower preconception BMI (21.7 vs 25.5 kg/m2, P=0.001). IBD type was not associated with inadequate GWG or excessive GWG, though people with inadequate GWG were 2-fold less likely to be on anti-TNF therapy. People with excessive GWG were more likely than those with adequate GWG to have babies with higher birth weight (3,364g vs 3,132g, P=0.003). People with inadequate GWG were not at increased risk of SGA compared to those with adequate GWG (adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 1.01; 95% CI: 0.37 – 2.71, P=0.99). Those with excessive GWG were substantially less likely to have an infant with SGA (aOR, 0.23; 95% CI: 0.07 – 0.72, P=0.01). On multivariable logistic regression analysis, excessive GWG was not associated with increased odds of delivering infants with LGA (aOR, 1.46; 95% CI: 0.54 – 3.95, P=0.46). There was no association between non-adequate gestational weight gain and preterm delivery or Caesarean delivery. Conclusions Less than half of persons with IBD have adequate GWG during pregnancy. Inadequate GWG was not associated with poor neonatal outcomes, and excessive GWG appeared to protect against delivering infants born SGA. Funding Agencies None

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology→Same topicPregnancy and Medication Impact→French-language works237,207→