Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25502164›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of physical anthropology2015

Relationships of maternal and paternal anthropometry with neonatal body size, proportions and adiposity in an Australian cohort.

Emma Pomeroy, Jonathan C K Wells, Tim J Cole, Michael O'Callaghan, Jay T Stock

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of physical anthropology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Disentangling the associations between parental BMI and offspring body composition using the four-component model.American journal of human biology : the official journal of the Human Biology Council · 2016
    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 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Emma PomeroyNewnham College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Division of Biological Anthropology, Department of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Jonathan C K Wells
Tim J Cole
Michael O'Callaghan
Jay T Stock
University College London · GBNewham College · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GBUniversity of Queensland · AU

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/J004839/1Medical Research Council MR/M012069/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The patterns of association between maternal or paternal and neonatal phenotype may offer insight into how neonatal characteristics are shaped by evolutionary processes, such as conflicting parental interests in fetal investment and obstetric constraints. Paternal interests are theoretically served by maximizing fetal growth, and maternal interests by managing investment in current and future offspring, but whether paternal and maternal influences act on different components of overall size is unknown. We tested whether parents' prepregnancy height and body mass index (BMI) were related to neonatal anthropometry (birthweight, head circumference, absolute and proportional limb segment and trunk lengths, subcutaneous fat) among 1,041 Australian neonates using stepwise linear regression. Maternal and paternal height and maternal BMI were associated with birthweight. Paternal height related to offspring forearm and lower leg lengths, maternal height and BMI to neonatal head circumference, and maternal BMI to offspring adiposity. Principal components analysis identified three components of variability reflecting neonatal "head and trunk skeletal size," "adiposity," and "limb lengths." Regression analyses of the component scores supported the associations of head and trunk size or adiposity with maternal anthropometry, and limb lengths with paternal anthropometry. Our results suggest that while neonatal fatness reflects environmental conditions (maternal physiology), head circumference and limb and trunk lengths show differing associations with parental anthropometry. These patterns may reflect genetics, parental imprinting and environmental influences in a manner consistent with parental conflicts of interest. Paternal height may relate to neonatal limb length as a means of increasing fetal growth without exacerbating the risk of obstetric complications.

Indexed as

AdiposityAdultAnthropometryAustraliaBirth WeightBody HeightBody SizeCohort StudiesFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornMaleParentsPrincipal Component AnalysisYoung Adultbirthweightlimb lengthneonatal anthropometryparental BMIparental height

Identifiers

PMID25502164
PMCPMC4404025
OpenAlexW1931761068

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.