Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Dec;25(12):e13826.
doi: 10.1111/obr.13826. Epub 2024 Oct 3.

Investigating discrepancies in findings between rigorous randomized trials and meta-analyses evaluating pregnancy interventions to limit gestational weight gain

Jodie M Dodd  1   2 , Andrea R Deussen  1 , Amanda J Poprzeczny  1   2 , Laura J Slade  1   2 , Megan Mitchell  1 , Jennie Louise  3   4
Affiliations

Investigating discrepancies in findings between rigorous randomized trials and meta-analyses evaluating pregnancy interventions to limit gestational weight gain

Jodie M Dodd et al. Obes Rev. 2024 Dec.

Abstract

Introduction: Robust randomized trials consistently demonstrate little impact from diet and physical activity interventions on gestational weight gain (GWG) and clinical outcomes, although meta-analyses report some benefit. Our aim was to evaluate the effect of trial quality on treatment effect estimates and review conclusions.

Methods: We conducted a systematic review of dietary and/or physical activity interventions for pregnant women with a body mass index ≥18.5 kg/m2. We assessed studies for risk of bias and methodological features impacting reliability. Outcomes included GWG; gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM); pre-eclampsia; caesarean birth; and birth weight measures. For each outcome, a sequence of meta-analyses was performed based on intervention group and level of potential bias in the effect estimate.

Results: We identified 128 eligible studies. The most robust estimate from a combined diet and physical activity behavioral intervention, with only studies at negligible risk of bias, was a difference in GWG of 1.10 kg (95% CI -1.62 to -0.58; 17,755 women). There was no evidence of an effect on any clinical outcomes.

Conclusions: Our findings highlight discrepancies produced by the indiscriminate inclusion of studies with methodological flaws in previous systematic reviews. Regular weighing of pregnant women is futile in the absence of clinical benefit.

Keywords: dietary and lifestyle intervention; gestational weight gain; overweight and obesity; pregnancy; pregnancy outcomes; rigorous randomized trials; systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

REFERENCES

    1. Scott JA, Benjamin B. Weight changes in pregnancy. Lancet. 1948;1(6502):550‐551. doi:10.1016/s0140‐6736(48)92038‐8
    1. Dawes MG, Grudzinskas JG. Repeated measurement of maternal weight during pregnancy. Is this a useful practice? Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1991;98(2):189‐194. doi:10.1111/j.1471‐0528.1991.tb13367.x
    1. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). Weight management before, during and after pregnancy. National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE); 2010. http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/live/13056/49926/49926.pdf
    1. Chu SY, Kim SY, Bish CL. Prepregnancy obesity prevalence in the United States, 2004‐2005. Matern Child Health J. 2009;13(5):614‐620. doi:10.1007/s10995‐008‐0388‐3
    1. de Jersey SJ, Nicholson JM, Callaway LK, Daniels LA. A prospective study of pregnancy weight gain in Australian women. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2012;52(6):545‐551. doi:10.1111/ajo.12013

Publication types