ArticleObstetric medicine2016
Engagement with and outcomes of a Midwifery-led intervention group for pregnant women of high body mass index.
Article in Obstetric medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic overview of the literature regarding group prenatal care for high-risk pregnant women.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2017Pooled it
- Piloting a Telephone Based Health Coaching Program for Pregnant Women: A Mixed Methods Study.Maternal and child health journal · 2019Trial
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
aimsTo compare pregnancy care, maternal and neonatal outcomes of women with Body Mass Index (BMI) >30 enrolled in a Weight Intervention Group versus other models of antenatal care.
methodsRetrospective, case-control study of mothers with BMI >30 managed with a specialised programme versus age-matched women enrolled in standard models of care.
resultsOne thousand, one hundred and fifteen of 9954 pregnant women with singleton pregnancies, had a BMI >30, of whom 9.6% enrolled in the intervention group. Compared to controls, the intervention group had superior implementation of local high BMI guidelines, including; nutritional /weight gain advice (86% vs. 46%, p < 0.001), regular weighing (80% vs. 33%, p < 0.001), lactation consultant referrals (8% vs. 1%, p = 0.02), third trimester anaesthetic review and ultrasound (50% vs. 20.9%, p = 0.04 and 55% vs. 43%). Initiation of breastfeeding was higher in the intervention group (100% vs. 90%, p = 0.001). No significant difference was noted in Caesarean rate (30% vs 32%) and birthweight (3538 g vs 3560 g).
conclusionsWomen with high BMI enrolled in a specialised antenatal management programme received increased care, and had superior breastfeeding initiation rates. However, engagement was poor, and no significant differences were noted in antenatal or postnatal complications, mode of birth or neonatal outcome.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.