Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31465493›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Gestational diabetes mellitus, pre-pregnancy body mass index, and gestational weight gain as risk factors for increased fat mass in Brazilian newborns.

Laísa R S Abreu, Meghan K Shirley, Natália P Castro, Verônica V Euclydes, Denise P Bergamaschi, Liania A Luzia, Ana M Cruz, Patrícia H C Rondó

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. 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. Double Burden of Malnutrition Prevalence in Pregnant Women: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of human nutrition and dietetics : the official journal of the British Dietetic Association · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  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

8 authors.

Laísa R S AbreuNutrition Department, School of Public Health, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Meghan K ShirleyNutrition Department, School of Public Health, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-8800-0707
Natália P CastroNutrition Department, School of Public Health, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Verônica V EuclydesNutrition Department, School of Public Health, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Denise P BergamaschiEpidemiology Department, School of Public Health, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Liania A LuziaNutrition Department, School of Public Health, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Ana M CruzGeraldo de Paula Souza Health Center, School of Public Health, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Patrícia H C RondóNutrition Department, School of Public Health, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is a common complication of pregnancy. It may predispose offspring to increased fat mass (FM) and the development of obesity, however few data from Latin America exist.

objectiveTo investigate the influence of GDM on newborn FM in mother-newborn pairs recruited from a public maternity care center in São Paulo, Brazil.

methodsData were collected cross-sectionally in 2013-2014 from 72 mothers diagnosed with GDM, and 211 mothers with normal glucose tolerance (NGT). Newborn FM was evaluated by air-displacement plethysmography (PEA POD), and relevant demographic and obstetric data were collected from hospital records. Associations between maternal GDM status and newborn FM were investigated by multiple linear regression analysis, with adjustment for maternal age, pre-pregnancy BMI, gestational weight gain, type of delivery, sex of the child, and gestational age.

resultsFM was greater in GDM versus NGT newborns in a bivariable model (Median (IQR), GDM: 0.35 (0.3) kg vs. NGT: 0.27 (0.2) kg, p = 0.02), however GDM status was not a significant predictor of FM with adjustment for other variables. Rather, pre-pregnancy BMI (coefficient (β) 1.46; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66, 2.27), gestational weight gain (β 1.32; 95% CI 0.49, 2.15), and male sex (β -17.8; 95% CI -27.2, -8.29) predicted newborn FM. Analyzing GDM and NGT groups separately, pre-pregnancy BMI (β 6.75; 95% CI 2.36, 11.1) and gestational weight gain (β 5.64; 95% CI 1.16, 10.1) predicted FM in the GDM group, while male sex alone predicted FM in the NGT group (β -12.3; 95% CI -18.3, -6.34).

conclusionsCombined model results suggest that in our cohort, pre-pregnancy BMI and gestational weight gain are more important risk factors for increased neonatal FM than GDM. However, group-specific model results suggest that GDM status may contribute to variation in the relationship between maternal/offspring factors and FM. Our use of a binary GDM variable in the combined model may have precluded clearer results on this point. Prospective cohort studies including data on maternal pre-pregnancy BMI, GWG, and glycemic profile are needed to better understand associations among these variables and their relative influence on offspring FM.

Indexed as

Adipose TissueGestational Weight GainAdultAgedBody Mass IndexBrazilDiabetes, GestationalFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornMiddle AgedPregnancyRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsSocioeconomic FactorsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID31465493
PMCPMC6715169

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.