Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32883236›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2020

Competing priorities: a qualitative study of how women make and enact decisions about weight gain in pregnancy.

Meredith Vanstone, Marina Sadik, Sherry Van Blyderveen, Anne Biringer, Wendy Sword, Louis Schmidt, Sarah D Mcdonald

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

7 authors.

Meredith VanstoneDepartment of Family Medicine, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street W, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4L8, Canada. meredith.vanstone@mcmaster.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7347-6259
Marina SadikDepartment of Family Medicine, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street W, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4L8, Canada.
Sherry Van BlyderveenEating Disorders Program at Homewood Health Centre, 150 Delhi Street, Guelph, Ontario, N1E 6K9, Canada.
Anne BiringerRay D. Wolfe Department of Family Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital, 600 University Ave, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1X5, Canada.
Wendy SwordSchool of Nursing, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street W, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4L8, Canada.
Louis SchmidtDepartment of Psychology, Neuroscience & Behaviour, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street W, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4L8, Canada.
Sarah D McdonaldDivision of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street W, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4L8, Canada.

Funding

CIHR MOP-142253
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite ample clinical evidence that gaining excess weight in pregnancy results in negative health outcomes for women and infants, more than half of women in Western industrialized nations gain in excess of national guidelines. The influence of socio-demographic factors and weight gain is well-established but not causal; the influence of psychological factors may explain some of this variation.

methodsThis is the qualitative portion of an explanatory sequential mixed-methods study designed to identify predictive psychological factors of excess gestational weight gain (QUAN) and then explain the relevance of those factors (qual). For this portion of the study, we used a qualitative descriptive approach to elicit 39 pregnant women's perspectives of gestational weight gain, specifically inquiring about factors determined as relevant to excess gestational weight gain by our previous predictive study. Women were interviewed in the latter half of their third trimester. Data were analyzed using a combination of unconstrained deductive content analysis to describe the findings relevant to the predictive factors and a staged inductive content analytic approach to examine the data without a focus on the predictive factors.

resultsVery few participants consistently made deliberate choices relevant to weight gain; most behaviour relevant to weight gain happened with in-the-moment decisions. These in-the-moment decisions were influenced by priorities, hunger, a consideration of the consequence of the decision, and accommodation of pregnancy-related discomfort. They were informed by the foundational information a woman had available to her, including previous experience and interactions with health care providers. The foundational information women used to make these decisions was often incomplete. While women were aware of the guidelines related to gestational weight gain, they consistently mis-applied them due to incorrect understanding of their own BMI. Only one woman was aware that weight gain was linked to maternal and infant health outcomes.

conclusionsThere is an important role for prenatal providers to provide the foundational information to positively influence in-the-moment decisions. Understanding how weight gain guidelines apply to one's own pre-pregnancy BMI and comprehending the well-established link between gestational weight gain and health outcomes may help women prioritize healthy weight gain amongst many competing factors.

Indexed as

Decision MakingGestational Weight GainAdultFemaleHumansPregnant PeopleQualitative ResearchYoung AdultCounsellingGestational weight gainPregnancyPrenatal careQualitative methods

Identifiers

PMID32883236
PMCPMC7470685

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.