Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37220022›Full record

ArticleGlobal health action2023

Evaluating the application of the 2009 Institute of Medicine gestational weight gain guidelines on pregnant Chinese women.

Haili Jiang, Yin Jia, Xueying Wang, Chengyan Zhang, Yue Li, Huili Wang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global health action, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. High pre-pregnancy body mass index and gestational weight gain among women belonging to upper SES from Delhi, India.European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X · 2023
    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

6 authors.

Haili JiangDepartment of Obstetrics, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Beijing Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0001-6770-1838
Yin JiaSchool of General Practice and Continuing Education, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.ORCID 0009-0004-4719-7127
Xueying WangDepartment of Obstetrics, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Beijing Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Chengyan ZhangDepartment of Obstetrics, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Beijing Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Yue LiDepartment of Obstetrics, Beijing Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital, Beijing Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Huili WangSchool of General Practice and Continuing Education, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0002-7511-3689

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe 2009 Institute of Medicine (IOM) gestational weight gain (GWG) guidelines were initially developed for pregnant women in the United States.

objectiveThis study aimed to investigate whether the IOM guidelines were suitable for pregnant Chinese women.

methodsA retrospective cohort study comprising 20,593 singleton pregnant women was conducted at the Beijing Obstetrics and Gynaecology Hospital (1 January 2018 to 31 December 2019). Applicability was evaluated by comparing the GWG corresponding to the lowest point of the predicted composite risk curve with the 2009 IOM GWG Guidelines. The IOM Guidelines serve as the standard for the GWG categories and the pre-pregnancy body mass index. An exponential function model was used to fit the weight gain during pregnancy and the probability of caesarean section, preterm birth, small for gestational age, and large for gestational age. A quadratic function model was used to fit the combined probability of the above-mentioned adverse pregnancy outcomes. The applicability of the IOM guidelines was evaluated by comparing the weights corresponding to the lowest predicted probability with the GWG range recommended by the IOM guidelines.

resultsAccording to the 2009 IOM GWG Guidelines, 43% of the women achieved adequate weight, almost 32% gained excessive weight, and 25% gained inadequate weight. The GWG range proposed by the IOM included the lowest predicted probability value for underweight women and exceeded the lowest predicted probability for normal weight, overweight, and obese women.

conclusionsThe 2009 IOM guidelines were suitable for Chinese women whose pre-pregnancy body mass index was classified as underweight. The guidelines were not suitable for normal, overweight, or obese pre-pregnancy body mass index classifications. Therefore, based on the above evidence, the 2009 IOM guidelines are not suitable for all Chinese women.

Indexed as

Gestational Weight GainGuidelines as TopicCesarean SectionCross-Cultural ComparisonEast Asian PeopleFemaleHumansNational Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine, U.S., Health and Medicine DivisionObesityOverweightPregnancyPregnant PeopleRetrospective StudiesThinnessUnited Statesbody mass indexChinese womenGestational weight gainperinatal outcomesretrospective cohort study

Identifiers

PMID37220022
PMCPMC10208122

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.