Skip navigation
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://mnclhd.intersearch.com.au/mnclhdjspui/handle/123456789/611
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorFealy, S.-
dc.contributor.authorTaylor, R. M-
dc.contributor.authorFoureur, M.-
dc.contributor.authorAttia, J.-
dc.contributor.authorEbert, L.-
dc.contributor.authorBisquera, A.-
dc.contributor.authorHure, A.-
dc.date.accessioned2025-03-31T02:50:01Z-
dc.date.available2025-03-31T02:50:01Z-
dc.date.issued2017-01-
dc.identifier.citationBMC Pregnancy and Childbirth . 2017 Jan 17;17(1):36.en
dc.identifier.urihttps://mnclhd.intersearch.com.au/mnclhdjspui/handle/123456789/611-
dc.description.abstractBackground: Excessive gestational weight gain is associated with short and long-term adverse maternal and infant health outcomes, independent of pre-pregnancy body mass index. Weighing pregnant women as a stand-alone intervention during antenatal visits is suggested to reduce pregnancy weight gain. In the absence of effective interventions to reduce excessive gestational gain within the real world setting, this study aims to test if routine weighing as a stand-alone intervention can reduce total pregnancy weight gain and, in particular, excessive gestational weight gain. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted between November 2014 and January 2016, and reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Seven databases were searched. A priori eligibility criteria were applied to published literature by at least two independent reviewers. Studies considered methodologically rigorous, as per the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Quality Criteria Checklist for Primary Research, were included. Meta-analysis was conducted using fixed-effects models. Results: A total of 5223 (non-duplicated) records were screened, resulting in two RCTs that were pooled for meta-analysis (n = 1068 randomised participants; n = 538 intervention, n = 534 control). No difference in total weight gain per week was observed between intervention and control groups (weighted mean difference (WMD) -0.00 kg/week, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.03 to 0.02). There was also no reduction in excessive gestational weight gain between intervention and control, according to pre-pregnancy body mass index (BMI). However, total weight gain was lower in underweight women (n = 23, BMI <18.5 kg/m2) in the intervention compared to control group (-0.12 kg/week, 95% CI -0.23 to -0.01). No significant differences were observed for other pregnancy, birth and infant outcomes. Conclusion: Weighing as a stand-alone intervention is not worse nor better at reducing excessive gestational weight gain than routine antenatal care.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.subjectPregnancyen
dc.subjectPrenatal Careen
dc.subjectBody Mass Indexen
dc.subjectGestational Weight Gainen
dc.subjectPregnant Womenen
dc.subjectDieteticsen
dc.subjectThinnessen
dc.subjectWeight Gainen
dc.subjectOutcome Assessment, Health Careen
dc.titleWeighing as a stand-alone intervention does not reduce excessive gestational weight gain compared to routine antenatal care: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trialsen
dc.typeArticleen
dc.contributor.mnclhdauthorFealy, Shanna-
dc.description.pubmedurihttps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28095821/en
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12884-016-1207-2en
Appears in Collections:Allied Health
Midwifery
Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Files in This Item:
File SizeFormat  
12884_2016_Article_1207.pdf865.64 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Google Media

Google ScholarTM

Who's citing