Adaptive changes in multiple aspects of emotion regulation in the offspring of pregnant persons receiving a diet-and-exercise intervention relative to usual pregnancy care: a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human studies examining the influence of prenatal diet and/or exercise interventions on offspring neurodevelopment are mixed. Interventions that include the provision of whole foods, nutritional counseling, address exercise behaviors, and that utilize multimethod assessments of offspring emotion regulation (ER) may better reveal the impact of these interventions on neurodevelopment. To explore whether the Be Healthy in Pregnancy (BHIP) prenatal diet-and-exercise intervention improves ER in 22-mo-old offspring. Pregnant persons (>18 y, singleton pregnancy) were recruited between 12 and 17 wk gestation and randomly assigned to the intervention [high protein energy-controlled diet via the provision of cottage cheese, Greek yogurt, low-fat milk, individualized biweekly nutritional counseling, a controlled walking program, and usual pregnancy care (UPC)] or control (UPC alone) groups. ER in offspring [m age = 22.2 (SD = 4.04); 50.9% female; intervention: n = 29, control: n = 28] was assessed using reports from pregnant persons and their partners on the Child Behavior Checklist, and the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function-Preschool Version, laboratory observational tasks examining inhibitory control, attention, and empathy, and high-frequency heart rate variability (HF-HRV). Children exposed to the BHIP intervention exhibited medium to large effect size reductions in pregnant person and partner reported externalizing [effect size ƞ 2 p mother = 0.08, 95% confidence interval of the difference (0.05, 7.14); ƞ 2 p partner = 0.17 (1.68, 9.65)], internalizing [ ƞ 2 p mother = 0.08 (0.09, 5.32); ƞ 2 p partner = 0.13 (0.84, 8.88)], and total behavior problems [ ƞ 2 p mother = 0.09 (0.72, 11.87); ƞ 2 p partner = 0.17 (3.17, 17.88)] relative to control participants’ children. Pregnant persons, but not partners, reported fewer problems with inhibitory control [ ƞ 2 p = 0.13 (1.40, 8.55)], cognitive flexibility [ ƞ 2 p = 0.08 (0.18, 4.85)], emergent metacognition [ ƞ 2 p = 0.14 (2.00, 11.59)], and global executive function [ ƞ 2 p = 0.14 (3.37, 20.12)]. Intervention children displayed fewer impulsive behaviors [ ƞ 2 p = 0.11 (0.16, 1.77)] and a longer attention span [ ƞ 2 p = 0.08 (0.30, 13.34)]. Finally, intervention children exhibited greater baseline HF-HRV [ ƞ 2 p = 0.10 (0.16, 2.01)], and adaptive HF-HRV reactivity during the impulsivity [ ƞ 2 p = 0.12 (0.20, 2.19)], and attention tasks [ ƞ 2 p = 0.21 (0.74, 2.77)]. This intervention was associated with medium/large effect size improvements in offspring ER. Larger trials are needed to confirm the potential of these interventions on offspring neurodevelopment. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01689961 (21 September, 2012).
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".