2018
DOI: 10.1111/ppe.12439
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Good Practices for Observational Studies of Maternal Weight and Weight Gain in Pregnancy

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
68
1
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 65 publications
(72 citation statements)
references
References 56 publications
2
68
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…These included maternal age, education, number of pregnancies, number of living children, height, occupation, SES, household food insecurity, reported increase or decrease in the number of meals per day and quantity of food consumed due to pregnancy, reported receipt of food assistance, adequate minimum dietary diversity, micronutrient status (plasma ferritin, zinc, and retinol binding protein adjusted for inflammation; Wessells et al, ; sTfR, vitamin B 12 , and folate), markers of inflammation (AGP and CRP), and malaria antigenemia (HRP2). To explore which predictors were consistently and significantly associated with GWG per week and low GWG, we ran five independent analyses including GWG per week and GWG < 0.35 kg/week adjusting for women's GA, and GWG per week, GWG less than the third centile and GWG < 50th centile INTERGROWTH‐21st standards not adjusting for GA following the methods of the respective standards (Cheikh Ismail et al, ; Hutcheon & Bodnar, ; IOM and NRC, ). If a predictor was associated with at least three GWG (GWG per week and/or different definitions of low GWG) or both of the MUAC outcomes (MUAC in centimeters or low MUAC), it was considered to be a consistent predictor of low GWG or undernutrition.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These included maternal age, education, number of pregnancies, number of living children, height, occupation, SES, household food insecurity, reported increase or decrease in the number of meals per day and quantity of food consumed due to pregnancy, reported receipt of food assistance, adequate minimum dietary diversity, micronutrient status (plasma ferritin, zinc, and retinol binding protein adjusted for inflammation; Wessells et al, ; sTfR, vitamin B 12 , and folate), markers of inflammation (AGP and CRP), and malaria antigenemia (HRP2). To explore which predictors were consistently and significantly associated with GWG per week and low GWG, we ran five independent analyses including GWG per week and GWG < 0.35 kg/week adjusting for women's GA, and GWG per week, GWG less than the third centile and GWG < 50th centile INTERGROWTH‐21st standards not adjusting for GA following the methods of the respective standards (Cheikh Ismail et al, ; Hutcheon & Bodnar, ; IOM and NRC, ). If a predictor was associated with at least three GWG (GWG per week and/or different definitions of low GWG) or both of the MUAC outcomes (MUAC in centimeters or low MUAC), it was considered to be a consistent predictor of low GWG or undernutrition.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To assess the association between GWG or excessive GWG and PPD, analogous Models 1-4 were fitted. All models were additionally adjusted for pre-pregnancy BMI and the interaction term between pre-pregnancy BMI and GWG or excessive GWG, as previously recommended [38]. Models were fitted with GWG as a continuous variable or excessive GWG as a categorical variable.…”
Section: Association Between Gwg or Excessive Gwg And Ppdmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, we utilized a standardized measure of GWG in our analysis which helps alleviate this confounding. This adjustment is necessary in order to account for the fact that women are able to gain more weight the longer they are pregnant [21].…”
Section: Gestational Weight Gainmentioning
confidence: 99%