ArticlePloS one2025
Predictors of gestational weight gain in western India: Findings from a longitudinal study across rural and urban cohorts.
Article in PloS one, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGestational weight gain-GWG is an important predictor of neonatal growth. However, there is dearth of literature from rural and urban India depicting longitudinal patterns and determinants of GWG. To address this gap, our objectives were to study longitudinal patterns and predictors of GWG in pregnant women residing in rural and urban areas in and around Pune city, Maharashtra, India and to compare them with pre-existing guidelines provided by IOM, 2009.
methodsThis study enrolled 268(134-rural and 134-urban) healthy singleton pregnant women attending antenatal care centers in and around Pune, India between August 2020-September 2023. Participants were measured for anthropometry and interviewed for socioeconomic status, diet, physical activity, sleep quality, and prenatal distress once in each trimester. Pre-gestational weight status was calculated using WHO, Asian-Pacific, and South Asian BMI cut-points. GWG was estimated using IOM, 2009 guidelines.
findingsThe observed mean GWG was 10.9 ± 4.2 kg(rural:9.9 ± 3.7, urban:11.9 ± 4.5). 61.2% of rural and 30% of urban underweight pregnant women did not gain adequate weight. 11.8% of rural and 57.3% of urban pregnant women with overweight or obese BMI exceeded recommended guideliness. Key predictors of inadequate GWG in second and third trimesters were low socio-economic status, parity, underweight pre-gestational BMI, prenatal distress, and poor sleep. The primary predictor of excessive GWG was overweight or obese pre-gestational BMI. These findings were consistent across all BMI classifications.
conclusionOur findings indicate that urban underweight pregnant women gained significantly higher weight. There was health disparity between rural and urban pregnant women that needs to be addressed to improve health of pregnant women. We have identified important modifiable factors such as dietary intake, physical activity, etc. to ensure optimal GWG which can inform public health policies. Further research is needed to assess whether context-specific GWG recommendations would be beneficial as our study is based on single geographical location and timeframe.
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.