Skip to main content
. 2020 Nov 23;10:20389. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-77429-9

Table 3.

Adjusted odds ratiosa and 95% confidence intervals for foetal acidosis based on gestational weight gain described in Japanese criteria28.

BMI category (kg/m2) Gestational weight gain
Insufficient Appropriate Excessive
UmA-pH < 7.2
Group 1; BMI < 18.5 (n = 10,935) n = 5550 n = 3316 n = 2069
 Model 1 aOR (95% CI) 0.88 (0.73–1.05) Ref 0.98 (0.79–1.23)
 Model 2 aOR (95% CI) 0.83 (0.69–0.99) Ref 1.00 (0.80–1.25)
 Model 3 aOR (95% CI) 0.83 (0.69–0.99) Ref 1.00 (0.80–1.25)
Group 2; BMI 18.5–< 20.0 (n = 17,418) n = 6310 n = 6229 n = 4879
 Model 1 aOR (95% CI) 0.99 (0.85–1.15) Ref 1.10 (0.94–1.29)
 Model 2 aOR (95% CI) 0.98 (0.84–1.14) Ref 1.10 (0.94–1.30)
 Model 3 aOR (95% CI) 0.98 (0.84–1.14) Ref 1.11 (0.95–1.30)
Group 3; BMI 20.0–< 23.0 (n = 27,835) n = 7248 n = 9849 n = 10,738
 Model 1 aOR (95% CI) 0.95 (0.84–1.08) Ref 1.01 (0.90–1.13)
 Model 2 aOR (95% CI) 0.94 (0.83–1.07) Ref 1.01 (0.91–1.13)
 Model 3 aOR (95% CI) 0.94 (0.83–1.07) Ref 1.02 (0.91–1.14)
Group 4; BMI 23.0–< 25.0 (n = 7650) n = 1054 n = 2622 n = 3974
 Model 1 aOR (95% CI) 0.94 (0.69–1.29) Ref 1.21 (0.99–1.49)
 Model 2 aOR (95% CI) 0.91 (0.66–1.24) Ref 1.25 (1.01–1.54)
 Model 3 aOR (95% CI) 0.91 (0.66–1.25) Ref 1.25 (1.02–1.54)
Group 5; BMI ≥ 25.0 (n = 7961) n = 893 n = 2488 n = 4580
 Model 1 aOR (95% CI) 0.87 (0.64–1.20) Ref 1.05 (0.86–1.27)
 Model 2 aOR (95% CI) 0.86 (0.63–1.18) Ref 1.06 (0.88–1.29)
 Model 3 aOR (95% CI) 0.87 (0.63–1.19) Ref 1.07 (0.88–1.29)
UmA-pH < 7.1
Group 1; BMI < 18.5 (n = 10,935) n = 5550 n = 3316 n = 2069
 Model 1 aOR (95% CI) 1.23 (0.79–1.91) Ref 1.41 (0.83–2.39)
 Model 2 aOR (95% CI) 1.07 (0.68–1.67) Ref 1.48 (0.87–2.50)
 Model 3 aOR (95% CI) 1.07 (0.68–1.67) Ref 1.47 (0.87–2.49)
Group 2; BMI 18.5–< 20.0 (n = 17,418) n = 6310 n = 6229 n = 4879
 Model 1 aOR (95% CI) 1.00 (0.71–1.43) Ref 1.20 (0.84–1.72)
 Model 2 aOR (95% CI) 0.95 (0.66–1.35) Ref 1.24 (0.87–1.78)
 Model 3 aOR (95% CI) 0.95 (0.66–1.35) Ref 1.24 (0.86–1.78)
Group 3; BMI 20.0–< 23.0 (n = 27,835) n = 7248 n = 9849 n = 10,738
 Model 1 aOR (95% CI) 0.94 (0.71–1.25) Ref 1.03 (0.81–1.32)
 Model 2 aOR (95% CI) 0.89 (0.67–1.19) Ref 1.06 (0.82–1.35)
 Model 3 aOR (95% CI) 0.89 (0.67–1.19) Ref 1.05 (0.82–1.35)
Group 4; BMI 23.0–< 25.0 (n = 7650) n = 1054 n = 2622 n = 3974
 Model 1 aOR (95% CI) 1.56 (0.79–3.05) Ref 1.66 (1.01–2.74)
 Model 2 aOR (95% CI) 1.50 (0.76–2.96) Ref 1.72 (1.04–2.84)
 Model 3 aOR (95% CI) 1.50 (0.76–2.96) Ref 1.71 (1.04–2.83)
Group 5; BMI ≥ 25 (n = 7961) n = 893 n = 2488 n = 4,580
 Model 1 aOR (95% CI) 0.57 (0.25–1.30) Ref 1.00 (0.66–1.53)
 Model 2 aOR (95% CI) 0.54 (0.24–1.24) Ref 1.07 (0.70–1.63)
 Model 3 aOR (95% CI) 0.54 (0.24–1.24) Ref 1.07 (0.70–1.63)

Logistic regression models were used to calculate the adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for UmA-pH < 7.20 and for UmA-pH < 7.10, with women with appropriate gestational weight gain as the reference. BMI body mass index, UmA-pH umbilical artery pH.

aModel 1 adjusted for maternal age, maternal education, annual household income, maternal smoking during pregnancy, and parity. Model 2 adjusted for covariates in Model 1 and preterm birth and small-for-gestational age infants. Model 3 adjusted for covariates in Model 2 and mode of delivery.