ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2024
Antenatal care addressing gestational weight gain (GWG): a cross sectional study of pregnant women's reported receipt and acceptability of recommended GWG care and associated characteristics.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effectiveness of digital health interventions for increasing preventive care for smoking, nutrition, alcohol consumption, physical activity and weight (SNAP-W) in outpatient settings: a systematic review protocol.Systematic reviews · 2026Article
- Gestational Weight Gain Counseling Insights from Healthcare Providers and Saudi Women: Riyadh Mother and Baby Follow-Up Study (RAHMA Explore).Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Implementing clinical guidelines for gestational weight gain care: a novel application of best-worst scaling to prioritise barriers.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Hispanic Views About Online Information on Weight Gain, Diet, and Physical Activity in Pregnancy: A Qualitative Study.Global qualitative nursing researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Australian Clinical Practice Guidelines for Pregnancy Care recommend that during the first and subsequent antenatal visits all pregnant women are weighed; advised of recommended gestational weight gain (GWG), dietary intake and physical activity; and offered referrals for additional support if needed. The extent to which these recommendations are implemented and women's acceptability of recommended care is unknown. This study examines women's reported receipt and acceptability of guideline care for GWG, and characteristics associated with receipt of such care and its acceptability.
methodsFrom September 2018 to February 2019 a telephone survey was undertaken with women who had recently had a baby and received antenatal care from five public maternity services within a health district in Australia. Women self-reported their demographic characteristics, and receipt and acceptability of recommended GWG care. Receipt and acceptability of such care, and their association with the characteristics of women and the maternity service they attended, were examined using descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression analyses.
resultsOf 514 women, 13.1% (95%CI:10.3-16.5) reported that they received an assessment of weight at both their first and a subsequent antenatal visit, and less than one third (30.0%; 95%CI:26.0-33.9) received advice on their recommended GWG range, dietary intake and physical activity. Just 6.6% (95%CI:4.8-9.1) of women reported receiving all assessment and advice components of recommended antenatal care, and 9.9% (95%CI:7.6-12.8) of women reported being referred for extra support. Women who were younger (OR = 1.13;95%CI:1.05-1.21), identifying as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (OR = 24.54;95%CI:4.98-120.94), had a higher pre-pregnancy BMI (OR = 1.13;95%CI:1.05-1.21), were experiencing their first pregnancy (OR = 3.36;95%CI:1.27-8.86), and lived in a least disadvantaged area (compared to mid-disadvantaged area (OR = 18.5;95%CI:2.6-130.5) and most disadvantaged area (OR = 13.1;95%CI:2.09-82.4)) were more likely to receive recommended assessment and advice. Most Aboriginal (92%) and non-Aboriginal (93%) women agreed that recommended GWG care is acceptable.
conclusionMost women perceive antenatal care for GWG as recommended by the Clinical Practice Guidelines as acceptable, but did not receive it. When provided, such care is not delivered consistently to all women regardless of their characteristics or those of the maternity service they attend. There is a need for service-wide practice change to increase routine GWG care in pregnancy for all 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.