FRI418 A 6-month Lifestyle Intervention Program Improves Quality Of Life And Motivation In Women With Obesity And Infertility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Disclosure: K. Brûlé: None. A. Thibodeau: None. D. Maillet: None. M. Belan: None. F. Jean-Denis: None. M. Pesant: None. B. Carranza-Mamane: None. J. Baillargeon: Grant Recipient; Self; Ferring Pharmaceuticals. Introduction Infertility is the incapacity to conceive after 12 months of regular and unprotected sexual intercourse, affecting 11 to 16% of couples. Obesity affects fertility, increases fertility treatment costs, diminishes their efficacy, predisposes to many complications during pregnancy and presents risks for the offspring. To prevent those consequences, many organizations recommend that women with obesity be assisted in adopting healthy lifestyle habits before conception and maintain them during pregnancy. Also, women with infertility and those living with obesity score lower on the quality of life (QoL) scales. Therefore, our objective was to assess the impact of a lifestyle intervention on QoL and stages of change (based on the transtheoretical model) in women with obesity and seeking fertility treatments. Methods Women 18-40 years old with infertility and obesity (body mass index (BMI) ≥ 30 kg/m2 or BMI ≥ 27 kg/m2 for those with polycystic ovary syndrome), consulting at the fertility clinic of an academic center, were enrolled and randomized to usual fertility care (control group, CG) or the intervention program (lifestyle group, LSG) alone for 6 months and then combined to usual care. The lifestyle program focused on improving physical activity and nutrition and was based on motivational communication. It involved individual follow-ups with a nutritionist and a kinesiologist at weeks 0, 3, 6 and then every 6 weeks for 18 months. Also, participants needed to attend 12 group sessions, including workshops and physical activities. QoL scores from the SF-6D and FertiQol, levels of conviction (visual analog scales on 100), and stages of change were collected at baseline and at 6 months. Proportions were compared by Pearson chi-square tests and means by Student’s t tests or ANCOVA (correcting for the baseline value of the result). Results Among 127 women, 85 had available data at 6 months (CG=43, LSG=42). After 6 months, and compared to the CG, women in the LSG improved more their SF-6D (+0.029 ± 0.076 vs -0.017 ± 0.082, p = 0.009, p ANCOVA <0.001) and FertiQoL total score (+0.35 ± 6.85 vs -2.70 ± 11.80, p = 0.18, p ANCOVA = 0.02). A higher proportion of women in LSG improved their stage of change by ≥2 categories compared to CG (40.0% vs 13.2%, p=0.008). They better maintained their level of conviction about the need to improve their food habits (+4.0 ± 13.4 vs -2.7 ± 17.7, p ANCOVA=0.02) or their physical activity (+2.5 ± 10.2 vs -5.1 ± 13.8, p=0.006, p ANCOVA=0.01). Conclusion A lifestyle program targeting women with obesity and infertility significantly helped maintain or increase their QoL, levels of conviction for food habits and physical activity, and stages of change regarding lifestyle habits compared to usual fertility care. These results suggest that such lifestyle intervention can contribute to the well-being and maintenance of lifestyle changes in women with obesity who seek fertility treatments. Presentation: Friday, June 16, 2023
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".