<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><submitter>Sharma AJ</submitter><funding>NCCDPHP CDC HHS</funding><funding>National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion</funding><funding>Intramural CDC HHS</funding><pagination>1242-1253</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC8924792</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>25(8)</volume><pubmed_abstract>&lt;h4>Objectives&lt;/h4>Prepregnancy body mass index (BMI) and gestational weight gain (GWG) are known determinants of maternal and child health; calculating both requires an accurate measure of prepregnancy weight. We compared self-reported prepregnancy weight to measured weights to assess reporting bias by maternal and clinical characteristics.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>We conducted a retrospective cohort study among pregnant women using electronic health records (EHR) data from Kaiser Permanente Northwest, a non-profit integrated health care system in Oregon and southwest Washington State. We identified women age ≥ 18 years who were pregnant between 2000 and 2010 with self-reported prepregnancy weight, ≥ 2 measured weights between ≤ 365-days-prior-to and ≤ 42-days-after conception, and measured height in their EHR. We compared absolute and relative difference between self-reported weight and two "gold-standards": (1) weight measured closest to conception, and (2) usual weight (mean of weights measured 6-months-prior-to and ≤ 42-days-after conception). Generalized-estimating equations were used to assess predictors of misreport controlling for covariates, which were obtained from the EHR or linkage to birth certificate.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>Among the 16,227 included pregnancies, close agreement (± 1 kg or ≤ 2%) between self-reported and closest-measured weight was 44% and 59%, respectively. Overall, self-reported weight averaged 1.3 kg (SD 3.8) less than measured weight. Underreporting was higher among women with elevated BMI category, late prenatal care entry, and pregnancy outcome other than live/stillbirth (p &lt; .05). Using self-reported weight, BMI was correctly classified for 91% of pregnancies, but ranged from 70 to 98% among those with underweight or obesity, respectively. Results were similar using usual weight as gold standard. CONCLUSIONS FOR PRACTICE: Accurate measure of prepregnancy weight is essential for clinical guidance and surveillance efforts that monitor maternal health and evaluate public-health programs. Identification of characteristics associated with misreport of self-reported weight can inform understanding of bias when assessing the influence of prepregnancy BMI or GWG on health outcomes.</pubmed_abstract><journal>Maternal and child health journal</journal><pubmed_title>Bias in Self-reported Prepregnancy Weight Across Maternal and Clinical Characteristics.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC8924792</pmcid><funding_grant_id>CC999999</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>Contract # CDC 200-2016-M-91914</funding_grant_id><pubmed_authors>Callaghan WM</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Sharma AJ</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Dandamudi P</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Stoneburner AB</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Bulkley JE</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Leo M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Vesco KK</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Bias in Self-reported Prepregnancy Weight Across Maternal and Clinical Characteristics.</name><description>&lt;h4>Objectives&lt;/h4>Prepregnancy body mass index (BMI) and gestational weight gain (GWG) are known determinants of maternal and child health; calculating both requires an accurate measure of prepregnancy weight. We compared self-reported prepregnancy weight to measured weights to assess reporting bias by maternal and clinical characteristics.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>We conducted a retrospective cohort study among pregnant women using electronic health records (EHR) data from Kaiser Permanente Northwest, a non-profit integrated health care system in Oregon and southwest Washington State. We identified women age ≥ 18 years who were pregnant between 2000 and 2010 with self-reported prepregnancy weight, ≥ 2 measured weights between ≤ 365-days-prior-to and ≤ 42-days-after conception, and measured height in their EHR. We compared absolute and relative difference between self-reported weight and two "gold-standards": (1) weight measured closest to conception, and (2) usual weight (mean of weights measured 6-months-prior-to and ≤ 42-days-after conception). Generalized-estimating equations were used to assess predictors of misreport controlling for covariates, which were obtained from the EHR or linkage to birth certificate.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>Among the 16,227 included pregnancies, close agreement (± 1 kg or ≤ 2%) between self-reported and closest-measured weight was 44% and 59%, respectively. Overall, self-reported weight averaged 1.3 kg (SD 3.8) less than measured weight. Underreporting was higher among women with elevated BMI category, late prenatal care entry, and pregnancy outcome other than live/stillbirth (p &lt; .05). Using self-reported weight, BMI was correctly classified for 91% of pregnancies, but ranged from 70 to 98% among those with underweight or obesity, respectively. Results were similar using usual weight as gold standard. CONCLUSIONS FOR PRACTICE: Accurate measure of prepregnancy weight is essential for clinical guidance and surveillance efforts that monitor maternal health and evaluate public-health programs. Identification of characteristics associated with misreport of self-reported weight can inform understanding of bias when assessing the influence of prepregnancy BMI or GWG on health outcomes.</description><dates><release>2021-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2021 Aug</publication><modification>2025-04-05T16:07:19.452Z</modification><creation>2025-04-05T16:07:19.452Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC8924792</accession><cross_references><pubmed>33929655</pubmed><doi>10.1007/s10995-021-03149-9</doi></cross_references></HashMap>