Maternal obesity in pregnancy and children’s cardiac function and structure: A systematic review and meta-analysis of evidence from human studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The prevalence of obesity is increasing worldwide. Experimental animal studies demonstrate that maternal obesity during pregnancy directly affects cardiac structure and function in their offspring, which could contribute to their increased cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. Currently, a systematic overview of the available evidence regarding maternal obesity and alterations in cardiac structure and function in human offspring is lacking. We systematically searched the electronic databases Embase, MEDLINE and NARCIS from inception to June 29, 2022 including human studies comparing cardiac structure and function from fetal life onwards in offspring of women with and without obesity. The review protocol was registered with PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (identifier: CRD42019125071). Risk of bias was assessed using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Results were expressed using standardized mean differences (SMD). The search yielded 1589 unique publications, of which thirteen articles were included. Compared to offspring of women without obesity, fetuses of women with obesity had lower left ventricular strain, indicative of reduced systolic function, that persisted in infancy (SMD -2.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) -4.4 standard deviation (SD) to -0.4 SD during fetal life and SMD -1.0, 95% CI -1.6 SD to -0.3 SD in infancy). Furthermore, infants born to women with obesity had a thicker interventricular septum (SMD 0.6 SD, 95% CI 0.0 to 1.2 SD) than children born to women without obesity. In conclusion, cardiac structure and function differs between fetuses and children of women with and without obesity. Some of these differences were present in fetal life, persisted in childhood and are consistent with increased CVD risk. Long-term follow-up research is warranted, as studies in offspring of older age are lacking.
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 | 0.010 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.020 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".