ArticleObesity science & practice2025
Predicting Pregnancy in Preconception Weight Loss Trials: Is it Possible?
Article in Obesity science & practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Preconception Weight Loss to Prevent Childhood Obesity: Current Evidence and Research Gaps.Current obesity reports · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Predicting pregnancy is a challenge in preconception weight loss intervention trials. The current study examined whether self-reported pregnancy likelihood and timing were predictive of conception. Methods: Adults ( Results: Over the 4-year trial, 62 (30%) participants became pregnant. Participants who reported a high likelihood of pregnancy were more likely to conceive than those with a lower rating (45.7% vs. 21.1%). The sensitivity and specificity of a high likelihood rating predicting conception were 69%, 95% CI (56.2%, 80.1%), and 58%, 95% CI (48.9%, 67.0%), respectively. Among those who conceived, mean expected time to pregnancy was 21.6 ± 13.2 months while actual mean time was 11.3 ± 9.1 months. Baseline age, ethnicity, parity, BMI, income, and other demographics did not predict conception. Conclusions: Pregnancy likelihood estimates best predicted conception, but sensitivity and specificity were low. Future work may consider additional ways to screen for likelihood of conception in preconception trials.
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.