MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400654080 · doi:10.23889/ijpds.v9i2.2401

Global trends in prevalence of maternal overweight and obesity: A systematic review and meta-analysis of routinely collected data retrospective cohorts

2024· review· en· W4400654080 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Population Data Science · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersQueen's UniversityQueen's University Belfast
KeywordsOverweightObesityMeta-analysisMedicineEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pregnant women with obesity are at greater risk of complications during pregnancy, peripartum and post-partum, compared to women with healthy BMI. Worldwide data demonstrating the changes in trends of maternal overweight and obesity prevalence informs service development to address maternal obesity, while directing resources to areas of greatest need. This systematic review and meta-analysis of population level data sought to evaluate global temporal changes in prevalence of maternal obesity and overweight/obesity, and compare trends between regions. Pooled prevalence of obesity and overweight/obesity was estimated using random effects meta-analysis. Temporal and geographical trends in prevalence of obesity and overweight/obesity were examined using linear regression. From 11,684 publications, 94 met inclusion criteria representing 121 study cohorts (Europe n = 71; North America n = 23; Australia/Oceania n = 10; Asia n = 5; South America n = 12), totalling 49,009,168 pregnancies. No studies from Africa met the inclusion criteria. Eighty studies (85.1%) were evaluated as having a low risk of bias and 14 studies (14.9%) moderate. In the most recent full decade (2010-2019), global prevalence of maternal obesity was estimated as 16.3% (95% confidence interval (CI): 15.1-17.5%), or approximately one in six pregnancies. Combined overweight/obesity in pregnancy had a pooled prevalence of 43.8% (95%CI: 42.2-45.4%), approaching half of all pregnancies. In each continent, an upward trend similar to the global trend was observed. North America demonstrated the highest prevalence (obesity: 18.7% (95%CI: 15.0-23.2%)); overweight/obesity: 47.0% (95%CI: 45.7-48.3%)) and Asia demonstrated the lowest prevalence (obesity: 10.8% (95%CI: 7.0-16.5%)); overweight/obesity: 28.5% (95%CI: 18.3-41.5%)). Both maternal obesity and combined overweight/obesity prevalence increased annually by 0.34% and 0.64% (p < 0.001), respectively. Our linear regression model estimates current global prevalence of maternal obesity as 20.9% (95%CI 18.6-23.1%) and projects that this will increase to 23.3% (95%CI 20.3-26.2%) by 2030. Globally, maternal obesity and overweight/obesity prevalence is high and increasing, but varies greatly between regions, being highest in North America and lower in Asia. Maternity services across the globe should be adequately resourced to cope with the complexity of needs of pregnant women living with obesity. Future public health interventions should focus on reversing the high prevalence of maternal obesity observed across the globe. The availability of population-level data and research varies between regions, with more data required to understand the needs of maternal populations in the continents of Africa and Asia. Globally, there is a need for improved harmonisation and publication of data for monitoring and improvement of maternal inequalities.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.821
Threshold uncertainty score0.560

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.165
GPT teacher head0.483
Teacher spread0.318 · 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