MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414452719 · doi:10.1016/j.tjnut.2025.09.007

Does Diet Quality Change from Periconception to 3 years Postpartum? Findings from a Large United States Cohort

2025· article· en· W4414452719 on OpenAlexaff
Qianhui Jin, Sara M. Parisi, Sharon I. Kirkpatrick, Ashley I. Naimi, Lisa M. Bodnar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nutrition · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesOffice of Behavioral and Social Sciences ResearchOffice of Research on Women's HealthNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of HealthCedars-Sinai Medical Center
KeywordsCohortCohort studyPostpartum periodQuality (philosophy)PregnancyFood intakeFeeding behavior

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Little is known about diet quality changes during the transition from periconception to postpartum. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to describe within-person changes in diet quality and related factors from the periconceptional period to 3 y postpartum in a socioeconomically and geographically diverse cohort of United States pregnant individuals. METHODS: We analyzed data from 4423 participants in the Nulliparous Pregnancy Outcomes Study: Monitoring Mothers-to-be Heart Health Study, followed from 6 to 13 wk of gestation to ∼3 y postpartum. Usual dietary intake in the 3 mo around conception and the 3 mo before the postpartum visit was estimated using a food frequency questionnaire. We calculated the proportion of participants adhering to food group recommendations from the 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans. For each food group, we estimated the proportion of participants with meaningful increases or decreases (defined as an increase or decrease by ≥20% of the recommended intake) in intake density and determined differences by maternal characteristics. RESULTS: For all food groups, adherence to recommendations was consistently low during both the periconceptional and postpartum periods, with few individuals' diets changing over time. Across food groups, the proportions of participants who improved adherence to recommendations ranged from 4% to 19%, whereas 7%-15% of participants experienced declines in adherence. Although few participants met recommendations, meaningful increases were observed in intake densities of vegetables, protein foods, oils, added sugars, and saturated fats (30%-49%), whereas decreases were common for fruits, grains, dairy, and added sugars (27%-47%). These changes primarily varied according to race and ethnicity and education. CONCLUSIONS: Improving the current food environment and providing sustained, accessible nutritional support that extends into the postpartum period may help individuals of reproductive age meet the dietary guidelines, which is crucial for improving maternal and child health outcomes and reducing related inequities.

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 score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.347
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

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NutritionSame topicGestational Diabetes Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207