Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23418751›Full record

Trial reportBMC pregnancy and childbirth2013

Developing a tool for obtaining maternal skinfold thickness measurements and assessing inter-observer variability among pregnant women who are overweight and obese.

Lavern M Kannieappan, Andrea R Deussen, Rosalie M Grivell, Lisa Yelland, Jodie M Dodd

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lavern M KannieappanDiscipline of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, School of Paediatrics and Reproductive Health, the University of Adelaide, Robinson Institute, Discipline of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Women's and Children's Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Andrea R Deussen
Rosalie M Grivell
Lisa Yelland
Jodie M Dodd
University of Adelaide · AUWomen's and Children's Hospital · AU

Funding

Limiting Weight Gain in Overweight Pregnant Women: Effects on Mother and ChildR01HL094235 · NHLBI · HARVARD PILGRIM HEALTH CARE, INC. · PI GILLMAN, MATTHEW W · 2008 to 2011
$1.3M
NHLBI NIH HHS 5R01HL094235-03
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIt is estimated that between 34% and 50% of Australian women entering pregnancy are overweight and obese, which is associated with an increased risk in complications for both the woman and her infant. Current tools used in clinical and research practice for measuring body composition include body mass index (BMI), waist circumference and bioimpedance analysis. Not all of these measures are applicable for use during pregnancy due to a lack of differentiation between maternal and fetal contributions. While skinfold thickness measurement (SFTM) is increasingly being used in pregnancy, there is limited data and a lack of a standard tool for its use in overweight and obese pregnant women.

methodsWe developed a standard tool for evaluating SFTM among women with a BMI≥25 kg/m2. Forty-nine women were measured as part of a prospective cohort study nested within a multicentre randomised controlled trial (The LIMIT Randomised Controlled Trial). Two blinded observers each performed 2 skinfold measurements on the biceps, triceps and subscapular of each woman. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and standard error of measurement (SEM) were used to analyse SFTM, body fat percentage (BF%) and inter-observer variability.

resultsThe ICC for inter-observer variability in measurements were considered moderate for biceps SFTM (ICC=0.56) and triceps SFTM (ICC=0.51); good for subscapular SFTM (ICC=0.71) and BF% (ICC=0.74); and excellent for arm circumference (ICC=0.97). The standard error of measurements ranged from 0.53 cm for arm circumference to 3.58 mm for the subscapular SFTM.

conclusionOur findings indicate that arm circumference and biceps, triceps and subscapular SFTM can be reliably obtained from overweight and obese pregnant women to calculate BF%, using multiple observers, and can be used in a research setting.

trial registrationAustralian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12607000161426.

Indexed as

Skinfold ThicknessAdipose TissueAdultAnthropometryCohort StudiesFemaleGestational AgeHumansObesityObserver VariationOverweightPregnancyProspective Studies

Identifiers

PMID23418751
PMCPMC3583701
OpenAlexW2049268540

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.