ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2024
Integrative development of a concise screening questionnaire for early detection of pregnant women at risk for dystrophy.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMaintaining a healthy diet during pregnancy is vital for reducing the risk of adverse birth outcomes. However, conventional methods of assessing the dietary behavior of pregnant women, such as the FFQ, are often time-consuming. This study aims to develop a concise nutritional screening questionnaire tailored for pregnant women, empowering prenatal healthcare providers to quickly identify key adverse dietary behaviors and provide targeted guidance.
methodsTo validate the Pregnancy Nutrition Checklist, we enrolled 208 women in early pregnancy and 200 women were included to analysis (with an average age of 31.54 ± 4.24 years). Spearman rank correlation analysis was used to assess the relative reliability of the Pregnancy Nutrition Checklist compared with the FFQ scale. Exploratory factor analysis was used to test the structural validity of the scale. A generalized linear model was used to analyze the correlation between dietary behavior and birth weight.
resultsThe pregnancy nutrition checklist includes 15 dietary items and 3 other lifestyle habit items. Compared with traditional FFQ questionnaires, the correlation analysis of corresponding items in the pregnancy nutrition checklist revealed statistical significance (p < 0.05), except for fat intake. EFA identified three underlying factors, namely, "high-fat foods," "moderate-fat foods," and "low-fat foods," indicating that the questionnaire has good construct validity. Insufficient consumption of vegetables by pregnant women(OR = 2.64, 95% CI: 1.08-6.46, p = 0.033) was associated with a significantly greater risk of developing LGA fetuses. Pregnant women whose sugar, coffee, or tea intake did not exceed the classification criteria had significantly greater fetal birth weights than those whose intake exceeded the classification criteria (OR = 3.38, 95% CI: 1.18-9.68, p = 0.023). In contrast, consuming fewer highly palatable snacks can reduce the incidence of LGA babies (OR = 0.29, 95% CI: 0.11-0.74, p = 0.010).
conclusionsThis tool has great potential for identifying unhealthy dietary behaviors, potentially leading to improved pregnancy outcomes.
trial registrationThis study was preregistered on May 5, 2023, at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2300071126).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.