MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4405315834 · doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2024.12.007

Relationship between prepregnancy body mass index and gestational age–specific risk of stillbirth and perinatal death in women with chronic hypertension

2024· article· en· W4405315834 on OpenAlexafffund
Jeffrey N. Bone, K.S. Joseph, L. Magee, Chantal Mayer, Sarka Lisonkova

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaChildren's & Women's Health Centre of British ColumbiaBC Children's Hospital
FundersUniversity of British Columbia Graduate SchoolUniversity of British ColumbiaSick Kids FoundationBC Children's Hospital
KeywordsMedicineChronic hypertensionBody mass indexObstetricsPregnancyGestational hypertensionPerinatal mortalityMass indexGestational ageGestationFetusInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Obesity is a risk factor for stillbirth and perinatal death and is often accompanied by chronic hypertension. However, there are few studies on the relationship between prepregnancy body mass index and gestational age–specific risks of stillbirth and perinatal death in women with chronic hypertension. Objective This study aimed to examine the relationship between prepregnancy body mass index and gestational age–specific risks of stillbirth and perinatal death in the presence/absence of chronic hypertension. Study Design This was a retrospective cohort study of all singleton births in the United States from 2016 to 2017. Data were obtained from the live birth and fetal death certificates available from the National Center for Health Statistics. Piecewise additive mixed models were used to assess the relationship between prepregnancy body mass index and gestational age–specific risks of stillbirth and perinatal death in women with and without chronic hypertension, adjusted for potential confounders. Results were expressed as gestational age–specific adjusted hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals. Results A total of 7,365,797 women were included in the study, of whom 255,464 (3.5%) were underweight; 3,233,710 (43.9%) had normal body mass index; 1,925,510 (26.1%) were overweight; and 1,065,958 (14.5%), 518,543 (7.0%), and 366,612 (5.0%) had obesity classes I, II, and III, respectively. Overall, stillbirth rates increased with increasing body mass index and were higher in women with chronic hypertension (14.2 per 1000 total births) than in those without chronic hypertension (4.7 per 1000 total births). The cumulative incidence of stillbirth increased at each gestational week, with the gradient increasing by body mass index category in women without chronic hypertension. However, this relationship was modified in women with chronic hypertension, for whom the increased risk of stillbirth by higher body mass index was reversed at 26 to 35 weeks of gestation. For example, at 31 weeks of gestation, the adjusted hazard ratio of women with a body mass index of 40 kg/m 2 vs those with a body mass index of 20 kg/m 2 and chronic hypertension was 0.78 (95% confidence interval, 0.65–0.93), whereas the adjusted hazard ratio of similar women without chronic hypertension was 1.39 (95% confidence interval, 1.30–1.48). The results were similar for perinatal death. Conclusion The relationship between prepregnancy body mass index and stillbirth is modified in the presence of chronic hypertension at 26 to 35 weeks of gestation when elevated body mass index is associated with a lower or similar relative risk of stillbirth and perinatal death. Nevertheless, women with chronic hypertension and elevated body mass index have higher absolute risks of stillbirth and perinatal death at all gestations. Our results suggest that, in women with obesity, optimal timing of delivery may differ depending on the presence or absence of chronic hypertension.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology→Same topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies→French-language works237,207→