2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.09.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The impact of maternal adiposity specialization on infant birthweight: upper versus lower body fat

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

1
3
0
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
1
3
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Similarly, the prevalence of low birth weight was minimum (around 18%) for mothers in the highest category of each of the nutritional status indicators and was maximum for those in lower tertile (above 40%). Similar associations have been reported for weight and height (13), BMI (14) and body fat (15), but are not reported for maternal sitting height or maternal head circumference.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 80%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Similarly, the prevalence of low birth weight was minimum (around 18%) for mothers in the highest category of each of the nutritional status indicators and was maximum for those in lower tertile (above 40%). Similar associations have been reported for weight and height (13), BMI (14) and body fat (15), but are not reported for maternal sitting height or maternal head circumference.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 80%
“…Maternal anthropometry is one such influential avenue that determines birth outcome. In particular, previous studies have highlighted the significance of maternal height, weight, gestational weight gain, prepregnancy body mass index and maternal arm circumferences as measures of current and past nutritional status of the mother as the predictors of birth weight (2)(3)(4)(5). However other measures like maternal head circumference and sitting height are less reported despite the fact that they are known indicators of maternal undernutrition.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As may be expected, thigh circumference increased in controls,46 but decreased in the intervention group; the impact of this finding on mother and infant is unclear. Nevertheless, a recent US longitudinal study assessing the link between maternal adiposity distribution and birthweight concluded that upper-body adiposity was a markedly larger determinant of infant birthweight than lower-body adiposity 47. Also, the intervention resulted in greater reduction in caloric intake and some improvement in diet quality.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, the effect of BMI on birth weight may be diluted, as observed in the lack of correlation between BMI and birth weight in current study. It was shown earlier that the discrepancy of maternal upper- and lower-body fat led to disparities in infant’s birth weight between women of similar pre-pregnancy BMI and GWG [48]. Besides, it should be highlighted that MUAC is a measure of nutritional status before and during pregnancy, whereas pre-pregnancy BMI is a measure of nutritional status prior to pregnancy and gestational weight gain a measure during pregnancy.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%