Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38664658›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2024

The impact of gestational weight gain on fetal and neonatal outcomes: the Araraquara Cohort Study.

Audêncio Victor, Laísla de França da Silva Teles, Isabel Oliveira Aires, Leticia Falcão de Carvalho, Liania A Luzia, Rinaldo Artes, Patrícia H Rondó

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

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 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Relationship Between Type of Delivery and Growth Trajectory in the First Year of Life: The Araraquara Cohort Study.American journal of human biology : the official journal of the Human Biology Council · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Audêncio VictorPublic Health Postgraduate Program, School of Public Health, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil. Audenciovictor@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8161-3639
Laísla de França da Silva TelesNutrition Department, School of Public Health, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Isabel Oliveira AiresNutrition Department, School of Public Health, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Leticia Falcão de CarvalhoNutrition Department, School of Public Health, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Liania A LuziaNutrition Department, School of Public Health, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Rinaldo ArtesInsper - Institute of Education and Research, São Paulo, Brazil.
Patrícia H RondóPublic Health Postgraduate Program, School of Public Health, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGestational weight gain (GWG) is an important indicator for monitoring maternal and fetal health.

objectiveTo evaluate the effect of GWG outside the recommendations of the Institute of Medicine (IOM) on fetal and neonatal outcomes. STUDY

designA prospective cohort study with 1642 pregnant women selected from 2017 to 2023, with gestational age ≤ 18 weeks and followed until delivery in the city of Araraquara, Southeast Brazil. The relationship between IOM-recommended GWG and fetal outcomes (abdominal subcutaneous tissue thickness, arm and thigh subcutaneous tissue area and intrauterine growth restriction) and neonatal outcomes (percentage of fat mass, fat-free mass, birth weight and length, ponderal index, weight adequateness for gestational age by the Intergrowth curve, prematurity, and Apgar score) were investigated. Generalized Estimating Equations were used.

resultsGWG below the IOM recommendations was associated with increased risks of intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) (aOR 1.61; 95% CI: 1.14-2.27), low birth weight (aOR 2.44; 95% CI: 1.85-3.21), and prematurity (aOR 2.35; 95% CI: 1.81-3.05), and lower chance of being Large for Gestational Age (LGA) (aOR 0.38; 95% CI: 0.28-0.54), with smaller arm subcutaneous tissue area (AST) (-7.99 g; 95% CI: -8.97 to -7.02), birth length (-0.76 cm; 95% CI: -1.03 to -0.49), and neonatal fat mass percentage (-0.85%; 95% CI: -1.12 to -0.58). Conversely, exceeding GWG guidelines increased the likelihood of LGA (aOR 1.53; 95% CI: 1.20-1.96), with lower 5th-minute Apgar score (aOR 0.42; 95% CI: 0.20-0.87), and increased birth weight (90.14 g; 95% CI: 53.30 to 126.99).

conclusionAdherence to GWG recommendations is crucial, with deviations negatively impacting fetal health. Effective weight control strategies are imperative.

Indexed as

Fetal Growth RetardationGestational Weight GainAdultBirth WeightBrazilCohort StudiesFemaleGestational AgeHumansInfant, Low Birth WeightInfant, NewbornPregnancyPregnancy OutcomePremature BirthProspective StudiesYoung AdultCohort studyFetal outcomesGestational weight gainIntrauterine growth restrictionNeonatal outcomesPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID38664658
PMCPMC11044382

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.