Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34760515›Full record

ArticleAustralasian journal of ultrasound in medicine2018

Anthropometric and ultrasound measures of maternal adiposity in the first trimester of pregnancy.

Narelle Kennedy, Ann Quinton, Michael John Peek, Valeria Lanzarone, Ron Benzie, Ralph Nanan

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

Article in Australasian journal of ultrasound in medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 94% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Narelle KennedyDiscipline of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Neonatology Sydney Medical School Nepean University of Sydney Nepean Hospital Penrith New South Wales 2750 Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0801-6317
Ann QuintonDiscipline of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Neonatology Sydney Medical School Nepean University of Sydney Nepean Hospital Penrith New South Wales 2750 Australia.
Michael John PeekANU Medical School College of Health and Medicine The Australian National University Centenary Hospital for Women and Children Garran Australian Capital Territory 2605 Australia.
Valeria LanzaroneDiscipline of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Neonatology Sydney Medical School Nepean University of Sydney Nepean Hospital Penrith New South Wales 2750 Australia.
Ron BenzieDiscipline of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Neonatology Sydney Medical School Nepean University of Sydney Nepean Hospital Penrith New South Wales 2750 Australia.
Ralph NananDiscipline of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Neonatology Sydney Medical School Nepean University of Sydney Nepean Hospital Penrith New South Wales 2750 Australia.
The University of Sydney · AUAustralian National University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimEstimations of central adiposity in pregnancy is a difficult undertaking due to physiological changes that occur in the body. Therefore, the value of some anthropometric measures particularly in pregnancy, such as body mass index (BMI), waist and hip measures are in doubt. The aim was to compare ultrasound (US) measured abdominal subcutaneous fat (USSFT) with other simple anthropometric methods for obesity assessment, evaluating these measures in pregnancy.

methodRecruited from a larger study, anthropometric measurements were performed between 11-14 weeks' gestation on 575 women. Measuring height, weight, hip, waist circumference, skin-folds of the triceps, thigh and

resultsThe anthropometric measures demonstrated good correlation (0.54-0.93) between individual adipose measures skin-folds, waist, hip, waist to height ratio (WSR) and USSFT with BMI, percentage fat mass and weight. USSFT correlated well with all anthropometric measures (0.54-0.73) correlating best with waist, WSR, BMI and weight. Waist/hip ratio demonstrated a poor correlation with USSFT, BMI, percentage fat mass and weight (0.3-0.41). Mean anthropometric measures were stratified across BMI categories describing adiposity distribution.

conclusionUSSFT correlates well with most anthropometric measures in early pregnancy. Limitations of the gravid uterus on waist measurements, hydration and compressibility of skin-fold measures and pregnancy influences on weight and BMI assessments could be overcome using US measures. There is a potential for post hoc evaluation using US for pregnancy complications. Maternal research could benefit from a more accurate measure of adiposity.

Indexed as

adiposityanthropometrypregnancyskin‐foldultrasound

Identifiers

PMID34760515
PMCPMC8409845
OpenAlexW2801266780

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.