Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25428213›Full record

Trial reportObesity facts2014

Representativeness of participants in a lifestyle intervention study in obese pregnant women - the difference between study participants and non-participants.

Joanna Gesche, Kristina Renault, Kirsten Nørgaard, Lisbeth Nilas

Abstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Obesity facts, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

4 authors.

Joanna GescheDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hvidovre Hospital, Hvidovre, Denmark.
Kristina Renault
Kirsten Nørgaard
Lisbeth Nilas

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo examine the representativeness of participants attending a lifestyle intervention study addressing obese pregnant women.

methodsRetrospective comparison of baseline data, attendance to oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) during pregnancy, and pregnancy outcome in eligible women stratified according to study participation. Of 750 eligible women with a self-reported BMI > 30 kg/m(2), and a live singleton pregnancy, 510 were eligible for inclusion and 425 were randomized to either active intervention (n= 284) or to standard obstetric care (n= 141) including two standard OGTT. The 85 women who declined participation or were excluded due to competing diseases and 240 women who did not respond to the initial invitation received the same standard care.

resultsThe randomized women had similar BMI but a lower parity and age, and were more frequently non-smokers, born in Denmark and married or cohabitating with their partner than the non-participants. Women participating in the trial had a higher compliance to the second OGTT compared to non-participants, also after correcting for age and nationality. There was no difference in pregnancy outcome, i.e., fetal weight and length, gestational age as well as mode of delivery.

conclusionWomen declining participation in a randomized lifestyle intervention study in pregnancy have characteristics indicating they are those who might benefit the most from lifestyle intervention.

Indexed as

Body Mass IndexExerciseLife StylePatient Acceptance of Health CarePatient SelectionPregnancy ComplicationsAdultDenmarkFemaleGlucose Tolerance TestHumansObesityPregnancyPregnancy OutcomePrenatal CareRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID25428213
PMCPMC5644893

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.