Neurodevelopmental Pathways from Maternal Obesity to Offspring Outcomes: An Umbrella Review of Cognitive and Behavioral Consequences Across Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Maternal obesity affects 20–25% of pregnancies globally and has been associated with adverse offspring neurodevelopmental outcomes. This umbrella review synthesized evidence on neurodevelopmental pathways linking maternal obesity to offspring cognitive, executive, and behavioral outcomes. Methods: Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, we systematically searched six databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, PsycINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL) for studies published 2008–2024. We included original peer-reviewed studies examining maternal pre-pregnancy obesity (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) and offspring neurodevelopmental outcomes using prospective cohort, experimental, neuroimaging, or systematic review designs with validated assessments. Risk of bias was assessed using Newcastle–Ottawa Scale, Cochrane RoB 2.0, and SYRCLE guidelines. Results: Analysis of 78 studies encompassing 650,000+ mother–child pairs from 17 countries revealed significant associations. Study designs included prospective cohorts (59%), animal experiments (22%), systematic reviews/meta-analyses (13%), neuroimaging studies (4%), and randomized trials (3%). Maternal obesity (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) was associated with reduced cognitive abilities (IQ differences: −2.5 to −5.8 points), impaired executive function (OR 1.4–2.3), and increased ADHD symptoms (OR 1.4–2.8) and emotional dysregulation (OR 1.5–2.2). Dose–response relationships revealed threshold effects at BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2, accelerating at BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2. Four primary mechanistic pathways were identified: inflammatory, metabolic, epigenetic, and neurotransmitter alterations. Only 57.7% of studies used prospectively measured pre-pregnancy BMI. Conclusions: Observational and experimental evidence indicates maternal obesity represents a modifiable risk factor for offspring neurodevelopmental impairment. The primarily observational human evidence, supported by mechanistic animal studies, suggests multimodal interventions targeting identified pathways during critical windows (pre-conception through early postnatal period) warrant investigation.
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 | 0.012 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.020 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".