Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27238757›Full record

ArticlePublic health nutrition2016

Diet quality before or during pregnancy and the relationship with pregnancy and birth outcomes: the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women's Health.

Ellie Gresham, Clare E Collins, Gita D Mishra, Julie E Byles, Alexis J Hure

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Public health nutrition, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
7.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 74 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Metabolic and feeding adjustments during pregnancy.Nature reviews. Endocrinology · 2023
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ellie Gresham1Research Centre for Gender,Health and Ageing,School of Medicine and Public Health,The University of Newcastle,Hunter Medical Research Institute Level 4,University Drive,Callaghan,NSW 2308,Australia.
Clare E Collins3School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medicine and Priority Research Centre in Physical Activity and Nutrition,The University of Newcastle,Callaghan,NSW,Australia.
Gita D Mishra4School of Public Health, Faculty Medicine and Biomedical Sciences,Centre for Longitudinal and Life Course Research,The University of Queensland,Herston,QLD,Australia.
Julie E Byles1Research Centre for Gender,Health and Ageing,School of Medicine and Public Health,The University of Newcastle,Hunter Medical Research Institute Level 4,University Drive,Callaghan,NSW 2308,Australia.
Alexis J Hure1Research Centre for Gender,Health and Ageing,School of Medicine and Public Health,The University of Newcastle,Hunter Medical Research Institute Level 4,University Drive,Callaghan,NSW 2308,Australia.
Hunter Medical Research Institute · AUThe University of Queensland · AUUniversity of Newcastle Australia · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess whether diet quality before or during pregnancy predicts adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes in a sample of Australian women.

designThe Dietary Questionnaire for Epidemiological Studies was used to calculate diet quality using the Australian Recommended Food Score (ARFS) methodology modified for pregnancy.

settingA population-based cohort participating in the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women's Health (ALSWH). SUBJECTS: A national sample of Australian women, aged 20-25 and 31-36 years, who were classified as preconception or pregnant when completing Survey 3 or Survey 5 of the ALSWH, respectively. The 1907 women with biologically plausible energy intake estimates were included in regression analyses of associations between preconception and pregnancy ARFS and subsequent pregnancy outcomes.

resultsPreconception and pregnancy groups were combined as no significant differences were detected for total and component ARFS. Women with gestational hypertension, compared with those without, had lower scores for total ARFS, vegetable, fruit, grain and nuts/bean/soya components. Women with gestational diabetes had a higher score for the vegetable component only, and women who had a low-birth-weight infant had lower scores for total ARFS and the grain component, compared with those who did not report these outcomes. Women with the highest ARFS had the lowest odds of developing gestational hypertension (OR=0·4; 95 % CI 0·2, 0·7) or delivering a child of low birth weight (OR=0·4; 95 % CI 0·2, 0·9), which remained significant for gestational hypertension after adjustment for potential confounders.

conclusionsA high-quality diet before and during pregnancy may reduce the risk of gestational hypertension for the mother.

Indexed as

Diabetes, GestationalDietHypertension, Pregnancy-InducedAdultAustraliaDiet SurveysFemaleHumansInfant, Low Birth WeightInfant, NewbornLongitudinal StudiesPregnancyWomen's HealthYoung AdultBirthDiet qualityFFQPregnancyWomen’s health

Identifiers

PMID27238757
PMCPMC10270877
OpenAlexW2419607419

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.