ArticleGlobal health action2023
Evaluating the application of the 2009 Institute of Medicine gestational weight gain guidelines on pregnant Chinese women.
Article in Global health action, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of two methods for assessing weight gain in Brazilian pregnant women.Revista de saude publica · 2026Trial
- Article
- Comparison of external cephalic version outcomes among pregnant women with different gestational weight gains under combined neuraxial analgesia and tocolysis: a retrospective study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Symptom network analysis of pregnancy stress, depressive symptoms and quality of life: a cross-sectional study of pregnant women in Xinjiang, China, 2023-2024.BMC psychology · 2025Article
- Association between area under the curve of oral glucose tolerance test and the risk of preterm birth among women with gestational diabetes mellitus: a mediation effect of gestational weight gain.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Maternal Weight Gain in Early Pregnancy with Healthy Live Offspring: Based on the China Birth Cohort Study.Nutrients · 2024Article
- Optimal range of gestational weight gain for singleton pregnant women: a cohort study based on Chinese specific body mass index categories.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- High pre-pregnancy body mass index and gestational weight gain among women belonging to upper SES from Delhi, India.European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe 2009 Institute of Medicine (IOM) gestational weight gain (GWG) guidelines were initially developed for pregnant women in the United States.
objectiveThis study aimed to investigate whether the IOM guidelines were suitable for pregnant Chinese women.
methodsA retrospective cohort study comprising 20,593 singleton pregnant women was conducted at the Beijing Obstetrics and Gynaecology Hospital (1 January 2018 to 31 December 2019). Applicability was evaluated by comparing the GWG corresponding to the lowest point of the predicted composite risk curve with the 2009 IOM GWG Guidelines. The IOM Guidelines serve as the standard for the GWG categories and the pre-pregnancy body mass index. An exponential function model was used to fit the weight gain during pregnancy and the probability of caesarean section, preterm birth, small for gestational age, and large for gestational age. A quadratic function model was used to fit the combined probability of the above-mentioned adverse pregnancy outcomes. The applicability of the IOM guidelines was evaluated by comparing the weights corresponding to the lowest predicted probability with the GWG range recommended by the IOM guidelines.
resultsAccording to the 2009 IOM GWG Guidelines, 43% of the women achieved adequate weight, almost 32% gained excessive weight, and 25% gained inadequate weight. The GWG range proposed by the IOM included the lowest predicted probability value for underweight women and exceeded the lowest predicted probability for normal weight, overweight, and obese women.
conclusionsThe 2009 IOM guidelines were suitable for Chinese women whose pre-pregnancy body mass index was classified as underweight. The guidelines were not suitable for normal, overweight, or obese pre-pregnancy body mass index classifications. Therefore, based on the above evidence, the 2009 IOM guidelines are not suitable for all Chinese women.
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.