Observational studyBMJ open2025
Comparison of statistical modelling methods for population-level gestational weight gain trajectories in ethnically diverse women in southeast Melbourne, Australia.
Observational study in BMJ open, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesAdverse lifestyle promotes escalating excess gestational weight gain (GWG) driving poor maternal and neonatal health outcomes. Recommended pregnancy lifestyle interventions rely on accurate assessment and prediction of GWG. A modelling technique to accommodate the complexities of GWG data and allow for the inclusion of maternal factors that influence the variation in GWG trajectory across pregnancy is necessary. We aimed to explore and determine the optimal statistical methods to accommodate data complexities such as nonlinearity, skewness and kurtosis and to model GWG trajectories from a large dataset of ethnically diverse pregnant women. DESIGN AND
settingThis is a retrospective, observational study of routinely collected health data from women with singleton pregnancies from 2017 to 2021 delivering at one of the largest hospital networks in Australia, located in southeast Melbourne.
participantsThere were 39 846 women with singleton pregnancies. Women had measurements taken during routine care at several time points throughout the pregnancy. Participants were from a diverse ethnic population, with the majority born overseas from 136 different countries (grouped into 12 world regions). OUTCOME: GWG was defined as the weight measured minus pre-pregnancy weight. Multiple statistical approaches were applied to model GWG trajectories: linear regression, cubic polynomial, neural network, generalised linear models and general additive model for location, scale and shape (GAMLSS) Box-Cox suite of models (including fitting fractional polynomials, cubic splines and penalised B-splines).
resultsThe dataset included 39 846 women and 109 339 GWG measurements. The two best-fitting models were derived using the GAMLSS Box-Cox t distribution: one with penalised B-splines and the other with cubic splines. Both models yielded the lowest Akaike information criterion and a generalised R-squared of 0.70. However, residual analysis indicated a preference for the model with penalised B-splines, making it the optimal choice. Using this optimal model, we demonstrate how to generate centile charts for the sample population.
conclusionThe optimal model developed will underpin our new epidemiological tool for the assessment and prediction of GWG. Using the model, individualised centile charts are relatively easy to produce, making them accessible to both healthcare providers and pregnant individuals. The visual nature of centile graphs makes it easier to see whether a woman's GWG is on track, which is helpful for making informed decisions about nutrition, lifestyle and healthcare.
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.