MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309659724 · doi:10.1111/aogs.14485

Impact of maternal body mass index and gestational weight gain on maternal and neonatal outcomes in twin pregnancies

2022· article· en· W4309659724 on OpenAlexaff
J Schubert, Nina Timmesfeld, K Noever, Susann Behnam, Angela Vinturache, Birgit Arabin

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Obstetricia Et Gynecologica Scandinavica · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWeight gainObstetricsBody mass indexPregnancyApgar scoreGestational ageGestationPopulationBirth weightNeonatal intensive care unitMass indexPediatricsInternal medicineBody weight

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: To date, there have only been provisional recommendations about the appropriate gestational weight gain in twin pregnancies. This study aimed to contribute evidence to this gap of knowledge. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Using a cohort of 10 603 twin pregnancies delivered between 2000 and 2015 in the state of Hessen, Germany, the individual and combined impact of maternal body mass index and gestational weight gain on maternal and neonatal outcomes was analyzed using uni- and multivariable logistic regression models. The analysis used newly defined population-based quartiles of gestational weight gain in women carrying twin pregnancies (Q1: <419.4 g/week [low weight gain], Q2-Q3: 419.4-692.3 g/week [optimal weight gain], Q4: >692.3 g/week [high weight gain]) and the World Health Organization body mass index classification. RESULTS: was associated with significantly increased rates of cesarean deliveries (aOR1.2, 95% CI: 1.01-1.41) and pregnancy-induced hypertensive disorders (aOR 1.53, 95% CI: 1.11-2.1) but not with any adverse neonatal outcome. Perinatal mortality (aOR 2.23, 95% CI: 1.38-3.6), preterm birth (aOR 1.88, 95% CI: 1.58-2.25), APGAR'5 < 7 (aOR 1.61, 95% CI: 1.19-2.17) and admissions to the neonatal intensive care unit (aOR 1.6, CI: 1.38-1.85) were increased among women with low gestational weight gain. Rates of cesarean deliveries were high in both women with low (aOR 1.25, 95% CI: 1.05-1.48) and high gestational weight gain (aOR 1.17, 95% CI: 1.01-1.35). A high gestational weight gain was also associated with higher rates of hypertensive disorders in pregnancy (aOR 2.32, 95% CI: 1.79-3.02) and postpartum hemorrhage (aOR 1.72, 95%CI: 1.12-2.63). The risk of preterm birth, low Apgar scores and NICU admissions showed a converse linear relation with pre-pregnancy body mass index in women with low gestational weight gain. CONCLUSIONS: In twin pregnancies, nonoptimal weekly maternal weight gain seems to be strongly associated with maternal and neonatal adverse outcomes. Since gestational weight gain is a modifiable risk factor, health care providers have the opportunity to counsel pregnant women with twins and target their care accordingly. Additional research to confirm the validity and generalizability of our findings in different populations is warranted.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations21
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Obstetricia Et Gynecologica ScandinavicaSame topicGestational Diabetes Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207