Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35908240›Full record

ArticleMaternal and child health journal2022

Associations of Gestational Weight Gain with Perinatal Outcomes in Western Brazilian Amazon.

Paola Soledad Mosquera, Maíra Barreto Malta, Ana Alice de Araújo Damasceno, Paulo Augusto Ribeiro Neves, Alicia Matijasevich, Marly Augusto Cardoso, MINA-Brazil Study Group

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Maternal and child health journal, 2022. 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. Review
  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.

Paola Soledad MosqueraDepartment of Nutrition, School of Public Health, Universidade de São Paulo, Av Dr Arnaldo 715, São Paulo, 01246-904, Brazil.
Maíra Barreto MaltaDepartment of Nutrition, School of Public Health, Universidade de São Paulo, Av Dr Arnaldo 715, São Paulo, 01246-904, Brazil.
Ana Alice de Araújo DamascenoDepartment of Nutrition, School of Public Health, Universidade de São Paulo, Av Dr Arnaldo 715, São Paulo, 01246-904, Brazil.
Paulo Augusto Ribeiro NevesDepartment of Nutrition, School of Public Health, Universidade de São Paulo, Av Dr Arnaldo 715, São Paulo, 01246-904, Brazil.
Alicia MatijasevichDepartamento de Medicina Preventiva, Faculdade de Medicina FMUSP, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Marly Augusto CardosoDepartment of Nutrition, School of Public Health, Universidade de São Paulo, Av Dr Arnaldo 715, São Paulo, 01246-904, Brazil. marlyac@usp.br.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0973-3908
MINA-Brazil Study Group

Funding

Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico 303794/2021-6Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico 307808/2017-3Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico 407255/2013-3Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior 372666/2019-00Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo 2016/00270-6
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo investigate the association between gestational weight gain (GWG) and perinatal outcomes in pregnant Amazonian women.

methodsData from 1305 mother-child pairs from the MINA-Brazil population-based birth cohort study were used. GWG was classified according to two methods, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) guidelines and INTERGROWTH-21st standards. Poisson and linear regression analyses were conducted to evaluate associations with perinatal outcomes.

resultsFollowing IOM guidelines (n = 1305), the rates of insufficient and excessive GWG were found to be similar (32%). Excessive GWG was associated with higher new-born birthweight (BW) z-scores; increased risks of macrosomia, large for gestational age (LGA), and caesarean delivery; and lower risks of low birthweight (LBW) and being small for gestational age (SGA). Insufficient GWG was associated with lower new-born BW z-scores. Among women with normal pre-pregnancy body mass indices (BMIs, n = 658), inappropriate GWG was high following both methods (IOM: 41.2% insufficient, 24.8% excessive; INTERGROWTH-21st: 25.2% below - 1 z-score, 16.9% above 1 z-score). Both methods also indicated that new-borns of women with excessive GWG had higher BW z-scores and increased risk of macrosomia and LGA. Women with GWG below the INTERGROWTH-21st standards were more likely to deliver an infant SGA and with lower BW z-scores.

conclusionsInappropriate GWG remains a health concern irrespective of the method used to classify weight gain. GWG above the recommendations of both methods and below the INTERGROWTH-21st standard was associated with adverse perinatal outcomes. Therefore, INTERGROWTH-21st standards seem to be a better fit for healthy women in this population.

Indexed as

Gestational Weight GainBirth WeightBody Mass IndexBrazilCohort StudiesFemaleFetal Growth RetardationFetal MacrosomiaHumansPregnancyPregnancy OutcomeWeight GainGestational weight gainGuidelines adherenceInstitute of MedicineINTERGROWTH-21st standardsPerinatal outcomes

Identifiers

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.