MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410836155 · doi:10.1016/j.clnesp.2025.05.036

An interdisciplinary intervention improves lifestyle behaviours in women living with obesity and subfertility: A secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial

2025· article· en· W4410836155 on OpenAlexafffund
Audrey St-Laurent, Matea Bélan, Farrah Jean-Denis, Marie‐France Langlois, Marie-Hélène Pesant, Belina Carranza‐Mamane, Karine Duval, Anne‐Sophie Morisset, Jean‐Patrice Baillargeon

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Nutrition ESPEN · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCentre hospitalier de l'Université LavalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeUniversité de SherbrookeCentre hospitalier universitaire de Québec
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchFonds de recherche du QuébecMinistère de la Santé et des Services sociaux
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialIntervention (counseling)ObesityPhysical therapyGerontologyPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND & AIMS: There are few effective interdisciplinary lifestyle programs aiming to support women with obesity who are seeking fertility treatments. This study aims to determine whether the Obesity-Fertility lifestyle program leads to healthier lifestyle behaviours in women with obesity and subfertility compared to controls. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of an open-label randomized controlled trial whose primary outcome was live birth rate. Women with obesity and subfertility were randomized to the lifestyle (LSG = 65) or control (CG = 65) groups. The LSG participated in individual and group sessions with a dietitian and a kinesiologist, while the CG received the usual care of the fertility clinic. Data on food consumption, physical activity, sedentary time, and smoking and alcohol use were collected before and 6 months after the intervention. Functional capacity was evaluated with a 6-min walk test (6MWT). Changes in lifestyle after 6 months were compared between groups with p-values corrected for the outcome baseline data. RESULTS: From January 2012 to September 2016, 130 women were randomized, 85 of whom had data available at 6 ± 1 months (LSG = 42 and CG = 43). Groups had similar sociodemographic characteristics and lifestyle behaviours at baseline, except for lower prevalence of smoking in LSG (9.5 %) vs CG (34.9 %) (p = 0.005). After 6 months of follow-up, and compared to the CG, women in the LSG significantly improved their intake of whole fruits (+1.1 ± 1.2 vs +0.4 ± 0.8/day, p = 0.001), whole grain products (+1.0 ± 1.3 vs +0.04 ± 1.2/day, p < 0.001), dairy products (+0.4[0; 0.9] vs -0.1[-0.7; 0.3]/day, p < 0.001); breakfast frequency (+1.4 ± 2.6 vs +0.5 ± 1.8/week, p < 0.001); proportion of active women (>3 kcal/kg/day: +14.2 % vs +2.3 %, p = 0.003); and time spent in sedentary behaviour (-6.7 vs -0.1 h/week, p < 0.005). Distance covered during the 6MWT tended to increase more in LSG vs CG (+28.8 ± 42.1 vs +5.5 ± 42.6 m, p = 0.06). No significant difference was found between groups for sleep duration, alcohol consumption and smoking use. CONCLUSION: After 6 months, the Obesity-Fertility program significantly improved diet quality, physical activity level and sedentary behaviour in women with obesity and subfertility. Such programs can therefore support these women to adopt healthier lifestyle behaviours. GOV REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01483612.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.005
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.382 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueClinical Nutrition ESPENSame topicReproductive Health and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207