Dataset Information

Agreement between self-reported pre-pregnancy weight and measured first-trimester weight in Brazilian women.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Self-reported pre-pregnancy weight and weight measured in the first trimester are both used to estimate pre-pregnancy body mass index (BMI) and gestational weight gain (GWG) but there is limited information on how they compare, especially in low- and middle-income countries, where access to a weight scale can be limited. Thus, the main goal of this study was to evaluate the agreement between self-reported pre-pregnancy weight and weight measured during the first trimester of pregnancy among Brazilian women so as to assess whether self-reported pre-pregnancy weight is reliable and can be used for calculation of BMI and GWG.

Methods

Data from the Brazilian Maternal and Child Nutrition Consortium (BMCNC, n = 5563) and the National Food and Nutritional Surveillance System (SISVAN, n = 393,095) were used to evaluate the agreement between self-reported pre-pregnancy weight and weights measured in three overlapping intervals (30-94, 30-60 and 30-45 days of pregnancy) and their impact in BMI classification. We calculated intraclass correlation and Lin's concordance coefficients, constructed Bland and Altman plots, and determined Kappa coefficient for the categories of BMI.

Results

The mean of the differences between self-reported and measured weights was < 2 kg during the three intervals examined for BMCNC (1.42, 1.39 and 1.56 kg) and about 1 kg for SISVAN (1.0, 1.1 and 1.2 kg). Intraclass correlation and Lin's coefficient were > 0.90 for both datasets in all time intervals. Bland and Altman plots showed that the majority of the difference laid in the ±2 kg interval and that the differences did not vary according to measured first-trimester BMI. Kappa coefficient values were > 0.80 for both datasets at all intervals. Using self-reported pre-pregnancy or measured weight would change, in total, the classification of BMI in 15.9, 13.5, and 12.2% of women in the BMCNC and 12.1, 10.7, and 10.2% in the SISVAN, at 30-94, 30-60 and 30-45 days, respectively.

Conclusion

In Brazil, self-reported pre-pregnancy weight can be used for calculation of BMI and GWG when an early measurement of weight during pregnancy is not available. These results are especially important in a country where the majority of woman do not initiate prenatal care early in pregnancy.

SUBMITTER: Rangel Bousquet Carrilho T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7690094 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Agreement between self-reported pre-pregnancy weight and measured first-trimester weight in Brazilian women.

Rangel Bousquet Carrilho Thaís T M Rasmussen Kathleen K Rodrigues Farias Dayana D Freitas Costa Nathalia Cristina NC Araújo Batalha Mônica M E Reichenheim Michael M O Ohuma Eric E Hutcheon Jennifer A JA Kac Gilberto G

BMC pregnancy and childbirth 20201126 1

<h4>Background</h4>Self-reported pre-pregnancy weight and weight measured in the first trimester are both used to estimate pre-pregnancy body mass index (BMI) and gestational weight gain (GWG) but there is limited information on how they compare, especially in low- and middle-income countries, where access to a weight scale can be limited. Thus, the main goal of this study was to evaluate the agreement between self-reported pre-pregnancy weight and weight measured during the first trimester of p ...[more]

PMID: 33243188

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objective To develop a pre-pregnancy or first-trimester risk score to identify women at high risk of preterm birth. Study design In this retrospective cohort analysis, the sample was drawn from California singleton livebirths from 2007 to 2012 with linked birth certificate and hospital discharge records. The dataset was divided into a training (2/3 of sample) and a testing (1/3 of sample) set for discovery and validation. Predictive models for preterm birth using pre-pregnancy or first-trimester maternal factors were developed using backward stepwise logistic regression on a training dataset. A risk score for preterm birth was created for each pregnancy using beta-coefficients for each maternal factor remaining in the final multivariable model. Risk score utility was replicated in a testing dataset and by race/ethnicity and payer for prenatal care. Results The sample included 2,339,696 pregnancies divided into training and testing datasets. Twenty-three maternal risk factors were identified including several that were associated with a two or more increased odds of preterm birth (preexisting diabetes, preexisting hypertension, sickle cell anemia, and previous preterm birth). Approximately 40% of women with a risk score ≥ 3.0 in the training and testing samples delivered preterm (40.6% and 40.8%, respectively) compared to 3.1-3.3% of women with a risk score of 0.0 [odds ratio (OR) 13.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) 10.7-15.8, training; OR 12.2, 95% CI 9.4-15.9, testing). Additionally, over 18% of women with a risk score ≥ 3.0 had an adverse outcome other than preterm birth. Conclusion Maternal factors that are identifiable prior to pregnancy or during the first-trimester can be used create a cumulative risk score to identify women at the lowest and highest risk for preterm birth regardless of race/ethnicity or socioeconomic status. Further, we found that this cumulative risk score could also identify women at risk for other adverse outcomes who did not have a preterm birth. The risk score is not an effective screening test, but does identify women at very high risk of a preterm birth.

Project description:ObjectiveTo document the terminology patients hear during the treatment course for a nonviable pregnancy and to ask patients their perceived clarity and preference of terminology to identify a patient-centered lexicon.MethodsWe performed a preplanned substudy survey of English-speaking participants in New York, Pennsylvania, and California at the time of enrollment in a randomized multisite trial of medical management of first-trimester early pregnancy loss. The six-item survey, administered on paper or an electronic tablet, was developed and piloted for internal and external validity. We used a visual analog scale and quantified tests of associations between participant characteristics and survey responses using risk ratios.ResultsWe approached 155 English-speaking participants in the parent study, of whom 145 (93.5%) participated. In the process of receiving their diagnosis from a clinician, participants reported hearing the terms "miscarriage" (n=109 [75.2%]) and "early pregnancy loss" (n=73 [50.3%]) more than "early pregnancy failure" (n=31 [21.3%]) and "spontaneous abortion" (n=21 [14.4%]). The majority selected "miscarriage" (n=79 [54.5%]) followed by "early pregnancy loss" (n=49 [33.8%]) as their preferred term. In multivariable models controlling for study site, ethnicity, race, history of induced abortion, and whether the current pregnancy was planned, women indicated that "spontaneous abortion" and "early pregnancy failure" were significantly less clear than "early pregnancy loss" (53/145, adjusted risk ratio 0.12, 95% CI 0.07-0.19 and 92/145, adjusted risk ratio 0.38, 95% CI 0.24-0.61, respectively, as compared with 118/145 for "early pregnancy loss"). "Miscarriage" scored similarly to "early pregnancy loss" in clarity (119/145, adjusted risk ratio 1.05, 95% CI 0.62-1.77).ConclusionThe terminology used to communicate "nonviable pregnancy in the first trimester" is highly variable. In this cohort of women, most preferred the term "miscarriage" and classified both "miscarriage" and "early pregnancy loss" as clear labels for a nonviable pregnancy. Health care providers can use these terms to enhance patient-clinician communication.Clinical trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02012491.

Dataset Information

Agreement between self-reported pre-pregnancy weight and measured first-trimester weight in Brazilian women.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Agreement between self-reported pre-pregnancy weight and measured first-trimester weight in Brazilian women.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets