Skip to main content
NCBI home page
International Journal of Endocrinology logoLink to International Journal of Endocrinology
. 2023 Jan 11;2023:3048171. doi: 10.1155/2023/3048171

Gestational Weight Gain and Small for Gestational Age in Obese Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Wen Chen 1, Beiyi Li 2, Kexin Gan 3, Jing Liu 3,✉, Yajing Yang 4, Xiuqin Lv 3, Huijuan Ma 3
PMCID: PMC9848811  PMID: 36686320

Abstract

Objective

This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the relationship between gestational weight gain and the risk of small for gestational age in obese pregnant women.

Methods

Studies were identified by searching the Web of Science, Embase, and PubMed databases up to June 30th, 2022. The meta-analysis was carried out to determine the risk of small for gestational age with gestational weight gain (GWG) below the 2009 Institute of Medicine (IOM) guidelines compared with within the guidelines in obese women. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale was used to assess the methodological quality. The chi-squared test, Q test, and I2 test were used to evaluate statistical heterogeneity. Subgroup analyses were conducted, and publication bias was assessed by funnel plots and Egger's test. Sensitivity analyses were performed for three groups of obese people (I: BMI 30–34.9 kg/m2, II: BMI 35–39.9 kg/m2, and III: BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2) to examine the association of obesity and SGA.

Results

A total of 788 references were screened, and 29 studies (n = 1242420 obese women) were included in the systematic review. Obese women who gained weight below the IOM guideline had a higher risk of SGA than those who gained weight within the guideline (OR = 1.27, 95% CI = 1.16–1.38, Z = 5.36). Both weight loss (<0 kg) and inadequate weight (0–4.9 kg) during pregnancy in obese women are associated with an increased risk of SGA (OR = 1.50, 95% CI = 1.37–1.64, Z = 8.82) (OR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.14–1.23, Z = 8.06). The same conclusions were also confirmed for the three obesity classes (I: OR = 1.38, 95% CI = 1.29–1.47; II: OR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.30–1.49; and III: OR = 1.26, 95% CI = 1.16–1.37). Subgroup analysis by country showed that GWG below guidelines in obese women of the USA and Europe was associated with risk for SGA (USA (OR = 1.30, 95% CI = 1.15–1.46), Europe (OR = 1.24, 95% CI = 1.11–1.40)) and not in Asia (OR = 1.17, 95% CI = 0.91–1.50).

Conclusion

Our findings indicated that obese pregnant women who had weight loss or inadequate weight (0–4.9 kg) according to the IOM guideline had increased risks for SGA. Moreover, we also evaluated that gestational weight loss (<0 kg) in these pregnancies was associated with an increased risk for SGA compared with inadequate weight (0–4.9 kg) in these pregnancies. Therefore, the clinical focus should assist obese women to achieve GWG within the IOM guidelines to decrease the risk for SGA.

1. Introduction

Obesity has increased dramatically around the world in these past decades, and it is a public health problem. Obesity in pregnancy is often associated with adverse outcomes such as pregnancy-induced hypertension, preeclampsia, gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), cesarean section, macrosomia, and neonatal asphyxia [1–3]. The Institute of Medicine (IOM) guideline revised the gestational weight gain in 2009 [4] and recommended that obese women should gain between 5 and 9 kg to obtain the best maternal and perinatal outcomes. However, the revision of the 2009 guideline did not provide recommended GWG for different classes of obesity.

Given the known relationship between gestational weight gain (GWG) above recommended and adverse perinatal outcomes, along with the long-term maternal health effects of obesity, physicians and women alike are exploring the possible benefits of weight loss during pregnancy-about 8% of all pregnant women reported attempting to lose weight, with the highest prevalence (13%) reported in obese women [5]. Moreover, the prevalence of actual weight loss increases with increasing obesity class, reaching as high as 15% in obesity class III [6, 7]. In this context, both prepregnancy BMI and GWG have been associated with maternal and fetal complications. However, there was no agreement on whether inadequate weight (0–4.9 kg) or weight loss (<0 kg) in obese women can contribute to improving neonatal outcomes or on the correct GWG to be reached to reduce these complications.

Some groups and meta-analyses suggested inadequate weight (0–4.9 kg) or weight loss (<0 kg) in obese women was associated with increase of SGA and low birth weight [8–12]. SGA and low birth weight not only increased the neonatal morbidity and mortality, but also some other chronic diseases such as type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and mental problems in adulthood [13–15]. However there is no agreement on inadequate weight (0–4.9 kg) or weight loss (<0 kg) in obese women. Some groups have suggested that appropriate management of inadequate weight (0–4.9 kg) or weight loss (<0 kg) can contribute to improving neonatal outcomes [6, 16, 17]. Therefore, the objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the relationship between inadequate weight gain during pregnancy and the risk of SGA in obese women.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Data Source and Search Strategy

This review was registered in PROSPERO with the number CRD42022345753. We comprehensively searched the Web of Science, PubMed, and Embase to identify related articles published before June 30th, 2022, using keywords and MeSH headings for Pregnant Women, Pregnancy, Obesity, Gestational Weight Gain, Weight Gain, Infant, and Small for Gestational Age (Table S1). No language restriction was imposed. Reference lists were also assessed to acquire additional relevant articles. All relevant terms, including free-text terms and MeSH terms, were used in the literature search. All reference lists of the relevant reviews were hand-searched for additional relevant trials.

2.2. Eligibility Criteria

Studies were selected if they examined outcomes in women with BMI defined as obesity (BMI > 30 kg/m2, I: BMI 30–34.9 kg/m2, II: BMI 35–39.9 kg/m2, and III: BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2) assessed by self-reported or objective measurement before pregnancy, during pregnancy, or postpartum). Studies were included if the following criteria were met: (1) Population of singleton pregnancies. (2) The primary outcome assessed was the SGA (defined as birth weight less than the 10th percentile of birth weight for sex and gestational age). (3) Women with BMI defined as obesity (BMI > 30 kg/m2, I: BMI 30–34.9 kg/m2, II: BMI 35–39.9 kg/m2, and III: BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2) assessed by self-reported or objective measurement before pregnancy, during pregnancy, or postpartum) [18]. (4) Obese women who gained weight below the recommendation of the 2009 guideline including less than 0 kg (weight loss) and 0–4.9 kg (inadequate weight) compared the gaining with the guidelines (5–9 kg) [4].

Studies were excluded if they assessed a population that is not representative (diabetes women and women with second pregnancy), if the combined effects between obesity and weight gain in obese women were not examined, and if they were duplicate or secondary publications, opinion articles, reviews, guidelines, posters, conference papers, case reports, nonhuman studies, non-English articles, and without enough data.

2.3. Data Extraction and Quality Assessment

Two investigators (LJ and LBY) independently searched, selected, and extracted publications from the literature. Inconsistent data were discussed by the two investigators to reach consensus or evaluated by a third senior investigator (GKX). To assess the methodological quality of included studies, we used a modified version of the Newcastle–Ottawa Quality Scale. Two researchers (CW and LBY) independently evaluated the study quality and assigned the quality grades. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus of them and another researcher (GKX). The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale is composed of three categories: “Selection,” “Comparability,” and “Outcome.” Our modified Newcastle–Ottawa Scale excluded one item (“demonstration that outcome of interest was not present at the start of study”) of the “Selection” category since the lack of relevance for our meta-analysis. The elimination of the item left a maximum of three points for the “Selection” category. As our outcomes required follow-up until the end of pregnancy, another item, namely, “was follow-up long enough for an outcome to occur” under the “Outcome” category was excluded. A maximum of two points were awarded for this column. The two “most important confounding factors” of the “Comparability” criteria were selected on the basis of a prior knowledge of their association with GWG and each outcome. This modified Newcastle–Ottawa scale [19] ultimately conferred up to six points. Due to the shortage of validation studies that provided a cutoff score for rating low-quality studies, an arbitrary cutoff of four or fewer was used to categorize a study as “low quality.”

For the outcome (SGA), the points for confounding were allocated as follows: one point was allocated for controlling for parity, and an additional point for age, smoking, or diabetes mellitus (DM). We designated the lowest score for the outcome (SGA) without controlling all the items. The final comparability score was the minimum score that a study received for all the outcomes. “0” means no point awarded; “1” means one point awarded [9].

Two reviewers (CW and LBY) independently extracted the following data from full-text articles: name of the first author, year of publication, country of study, time span of the study (years), study setting, study design, characteristics of participants (including the population, source, and categories of BMI), confounding factors, and adjusted OR (95% CI). The results were verified again by another independent reviewer (CW) (Table 1).

Table 1.

Characteristics of cohort studies included in meta-analyses of SGA in obese pregnant women who gained inadequate weight compared with those gained within the IOM.

Study Race Period Study design Population Setting Sample size (overall) Sample size in each obesity class Source of BMI Adjustment by factors Adjusted OR (95% CI)
Beyerlein et al. (2011) [20] Bavarian (Europe) 2000–2007 Retrospective cohort study Women with singleton deliveries in Bavarian obstetric units Bavarian Working Group on Clinical Quality Assessment Total n of samples = 709575; 2214 (only those weight loss); total n of obese women = 73128 Obese Class I: 49240 Measured Gestational and pregestational diabetes; smoking during pregnancy; gender parity; maternal age OR 1.36 (1.20–1.55)
Obese Class I
Obese Class II: 16673 1.68 (1.37–2.06)
Obese Class II
Obese Class III: 7215 1.45 (1.12–1.89)
Obese Class III 1.31 (0.96–1.79)
Bogaerts et al. (2015) [21] Belgium 2009–2011 Retrospective cohort study All liveborn singleton term (37 weeks of gestation or greater) births in obese women in Flanders (the northern part of Belgium) The Flemish Study Center for Perinatal Epidemiology database Total n of samples = 18065; 8467 (5120 gained within; 3347 gained below guidelines); total n of obese women = 18053 NR Self-reported Maternal and gestational age; parity OR 1.34 (1.18–1.51)
Obese Class I
1.28 (1.08–1.52)
Obese Class II
1.33 (0.98–1.79)
Obese Class III
1.17 (0.74–1.87)
Cox Bauer et al. (2016) [22] United States 1/2008–12/2013 Retrospective cohort study Women in the study who gave birth at any of 12 hospitals in a single, regional healthcare system Women in the study who gave birth at any of 12 hospitals in a single, regional health-care system Total n of samples = 17244; 4703 (3833 gained within; 870 gained below guidelines); total n of obese women = 10734 NR Calculated NR OR 1.53 (1.32–1.76)
Class et al. (2021) [23] United States 2000–2015 Retrospective cohort study The sample was limited to primiparous singleton pregnancies Electronic medical records (EMR) at the University of Illinois Hospital, Chicago Total n of samples = 25604; total n of obese women = 15753 Obese Class I: 7191 Self-reported Maternal age, year of birth, gestational age at delivery, GD, and PIH Obese Class II 1.3 (1.04–1.63)
Obese Class II: 5512
Obese Class III: 4102
Devlieg-er et al. (2020) [16] Belgium 2009–2014 Retrospective cohort study Women delivering a singleton term (≥37 weeks) live birth The data from Flemish study Center for Perinatal Epidemiology (SPE) Total n of samples = 337590; 17345 (10381 gained within; 6964 gained below guidelines); total n of obese women = 36791 Obese Class I: 26488 Measured Parity, maternal age, mode of conception (spontaneous and assisted), gestational age, and year of delivery OR 1 (0.75–1.33)
Obese Class I
1.29 (1.12–1.47)
Obese Class II: 7748 Obese Class II
1.48 (1.18–1.86)
Obese Class III: 2555 Obese Class III
1.22 (0.83–1.79)
Durie et al. (2011) [24] New York 2004–2008 Retrospective cohort study Singleton live birth ≥20 weeks Five Lakes Region Perinatal Data System Total n of samples = 73977; 7575 (2850 gained within; 4675 gained below); total n of obese women = 17517 Obese Class I: 9389 Prepregnancy BMI was calculated using the patient-reported prepregnancy weight and height as documented on the birth certificate Maternal race/ethnicity; maternal education; tobacco use; nulliparity; chronic hypertension; preexisting diabetes OR 1.38 (1.08–1.75)
Obese Class I
1.72 (1.02–2.92)
Obese Class II: 4728 Obese Class II
1.40 (0.97–2.02)
Obese Class III: 3400 Obese Class III
1.19 (0.80–1.75)
Durst et al. (2016) [25] United States 2000–12/2014 Retrospective cohort study Obese women with singleton pregnancies delivering University of Alabama at Birmingham Total n of samples = 5651; 2830 (1352 gained within; 1478 gained below guidelines); total n of obese women = 5651 Obese Class III: 1558 Maternal BMI was determined from the height and weight recorded at the first prenatal visit Adjusted for prior cesarean, age, race, parity, gestational age, payor status, and tobacco use OR 3.94 (2.04–7.61)
El Rafei et al. (2016) [26] Lebano-n 2001–2012 Retrospective cohort study Singleton livebirths with gestational age between 28 and 42 weeks The NCPNN network Total n of samples = 170428; 4122 (2310 gained within; 1812 gained below guidelines); total n of obese women = 11274 NR Calculated Body mass index (kg/m2), maternal education, maternal age, paternal age, smoking during pregnancy, newborn sex, consanguinity, and parity OR 1.01 (0.64–1.61)
Feghali et al. (2019) [27] United States 2012–2014 Retrospective cohort study We included women who had at least one measured weight between 24 and 28 weeks of gestation and documented prenatal care in the general obstetrics, midwifery, and maternal–fetal medicine clinics in our hospital system Magee-Womens Hospital of UPMC (University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) Total n of samples = 5814; total n of obese women = 2875 Obese Class I: 1551 Measured NR OR 1.62 (1.06–2.46)
Obese Class I
1.40 (0.90–2.14)
Obese Class II: 748 Obese Class II
0.73 (0.24–2.21)
Obese Class III: 576 Obese Class III
0.95 (0.45–1.97)
Gavard et al. (2014) [28] United States 2002–2008 Population-based historical cohort study 66 010 obese pregnant women in Missouri delivering liveborn, singleton Data from the Missouri maternally linked birth and fetal death certificate registry Total n of samples = 66010; 25976 (15075 gained within; 10901 gained below guidelines); total n of obese women = 66010 Obese Class I: 36568 Self-reported Maternal age, race, socioeconomic status, smoking, parity, cardiac disease, renal disease, chronic hypertension, and preeclampsia OR 1.12 (0.77–1.63)
Obese Class I
1.38 (1.17–1.62)
Obese Class II: 17195 Obese Class II
1.36 (1.06–1.75)
Obese Class III: 12247 Obese Class III
1.52 (1.10–2.09)
Hannaford et al. (2017) [29] United States 12/2008–4/2012 Prospective cohort study Women with singleton gestations Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University Total n of samples = 1120; 90 (49 gained within; 41 gained below guidelines); total n of obese women = 258 NR Prepregnancy maternal BMI was calculated based on patient reported height and weight smoking, chronichypertension, and macrosomia OR 1.40 (1.23–1.58)
Harper et al. (2011) [30] Missou-ri 1989–2005 Retrospective cohort study Women who were primiparous, who had singleton gestations, who were 520 years old, and who delivered at 24–44 weeks' gestation Swedish Medical Birth Registry Total n of samples = 76682; 1778 (1090 gained within; 688 gained below guidelines); total n of obese women = 6279 NR Self-reported Maternal age; race; smoking/alcohol use during pregnancy; medicaid use; prepregnancy BMI; chronic hypertension; DM; renal disease OR 1.28 (1.11–1.47)
Haugen et al. (2014) [17] Norway 1998–2008 Prospective cohort study Women who delivered a singleton liveborn child during gestational weeks 37–42 and recruited from all over Norway Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study (MoBa), conducted from the Norwegian Institute of Public Health Total n of samples = 56101; 1931 (1054 gained within; 877 gained below guidelines); total n of obese women = 4963 Obese Class I: 3680 Self-reported Maternal age; maternal height; maternal education; gestational weight; smoking, diabetes; separate analysis for nulliparous and parous OR 0.9 (0.78–1.03)
Obese Class II: 976
Obese Class III: 307
Hinkle et al. (2010) [31] Six unspecified states, United State 2004–2006 Retrospective cohort study Obese nonhispanic white, nonhispanic black, and hispanic women with available data from a prenatal and postpartum visit, singleton term births Primarily the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) Total n of samples = 122327; 51328 (26437 gained within; 24891 gained below guidelines) total n of obese women = 122327 Obesity Class I: 64717 Self-reported Education; gestational age; infant sex; marital status; maternal height; race/ethnicity; smoking OR 1.11 (0.82–1.50)
Obese Class I
1.59 (1.23–2.05)
Obesity Class II: 33156 Obese Class II
1.38 (1.12–1.71)
Obesity Class III: 24454 Obese Class III
1.25 (1.06–1.48)
Hirooka-Nakama et al. (2018) [32] Japanese 1/2013–12/2013 Retrospective cohort study Women who delivered singleton term live births between Approximately 280 secondary and tertiary hospitals participated in the JSOG successive pregnancy birth registry system Total n of samples = 64027; 1387 (560 gained within; 827 gained below guidelines); total n of obese women = 1840 NR Calculated from the self-reported prepregnancy weight and height Parity, maternal age, smoking, and gestational age, and generalized estimating equations (GEE) OR 1.15 (0.74–1.81)
Komini-arek et al. (2013) [33] United States 2002–2008 Retrospective cohort study 20950 obese women with a singleton, term live birth from the consortium on safe labor 12 institutions (19 hospitals) across nine ACOG districts in the United States Total n of samples = 20950; 7823 (3613 gained within; 4210 gained below guidelines); total n of obese women = 20950 Obese Class I: 11984 Self-reported Gestational age; insurance; marital status; maternal age; parity; race/ethnicity; smoking  
OR 1.41 (1.23–1.61)
Obese Class I
1.22 (1.01–1.47)
Obese Class II: 5307 Obese Class II
1.69 (1.32–2.16)
Obese Class III: 3659 Obese Class III
1.53 (1.15–2.03)
Mission et al. (2020) [34] United States 10/2012–8/2014 Retrospective cohort study All women with obesity (defined as a prepregnancy BMI >30 kg/m2), singleton gesta tions, onset of prenatal care before 24 weeks, and no history of pre-GDM at UPMC Magee-Womens Hospital (University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA) Magee Obstetric Medical and Infant (MOMI) database, which includes variables for all births at UPMC Magee-Womens Hospital in Pittsburgh, PA Total n of samples = 2698; 1211 (539 gained within; 672 gained below guidelines); total n of obese women = 2698 Obese Class I: 1446 Measured NR OR 1.22 (0.49–3.07)
Obese Class II: 701
Obese Class III: 551
Nowak et al. (2019) [35] Poland 11/2006–11/2007 Retrospective cohort study (1) Singleton pregnancy In the Obstetrics and Perinatology Department at Jagiellonian University Hospital in Cracow, Poland Total n of samples = 474; total n of obese women = 27 NR Calculated using maternal weight before pregnancy and height NR OR 2.13 (0.48–9.51)
(2) No maternal chronic diseases,
(3) No congenital fetal abnormalities
Oza-Frank et al. (2013) [36] United States 1959–1965 Prospective cohort study Obese women at their first prenatal visit, singleton 12 urban U.S. sites Total n of samples = 11203; 1899 (632 gained within; 1267 gained below guidelines); total n of obese women = 2789 Obese Class I: 1968 Self-reported Maternal age, parity, pre-pregnancy BMI, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, smoking OR 1.32 (0.85–2.06)
Obese Class II: 588 Obese Class I
Obese Class III: 233 1.55 (0.74–3.23)
Park et al. (2011) [37] Florida, United States 2004–2007 Retrospective cohort study Women aged 18–40 years with a singleton full term (37–41 week s), live birth; available information for prepregnancy BMI, gestational weight change, and LGA, or SGA status Florida live birth certificate Total n of samples = 570672; 37090 (17350 gained within; 19740 gained below); total n of obese women = 101590 NR Prepregnancy BMI data from Florida birth certificates Maternal age; race/ethnicity; education; marital status; smoking status during pregnancy; parity; WIC program participation; gestational age OR 3.1 (0.66–14.68)
Obese Class I
1.39 (1.15–1.69)
Obese Class II
1.41 (1.07–1.86)
Obese Class III
1.25 (1.03–1.51)
Robillard et al. (2021) [38] Europe 1/2001–12/2019 Retrospective cohort study All consecutive term (37–42 weeks gestation) singleton pregnancies (>21 weeks) live birth pregnancies delivered in the maternity The hospital records of all women delivered at the maternity of the University South Reunion Island Total n of samples = 61764; 3464 (1941 gained within; 1151 gained below; 372 weight loss); total n of obese women = 11097 Obese Class I: 6644 Measured NR OR 1.10 (0.78–1.56)
Obese Class I
1.49 (1.17–1.89)
Obese Class II: 2938 Obese Class II
1.48 (1.06–2.05)
Obese Class III: 1515 Obese Class III
1.13 (0.72–1.75)
Roussel et al. (2019) [39] France 1/2006–12/2015 Retrospective cohort study Singleton pregnancy, term delivery (between 37 and 41 weeks of gestation), and a BMI comprised between 35 and 40 kg/m2 Two hospitals providing level III (Rouen University Hospital) and II (Belvedere General Hospital) Total n of samples = 1537; 996 (424 gained within; 370 gained below guidelines; 202 weight loss); total n of obese women = 1537 Obese Class II: 1537 Maternal height and weight before pregnancy and weight at delivery from the flemish study center for perinatal epidemiology (SPE) Maternal age, parity, ethnicity, chronic hypertension, preexisting diabetes mellitus, and tobacco use Obese Class II 1.24 (0.74–2.06)
Salmon et al. (2020) [40] United States 2014 Retrospective cohort study Women were included in the present study if they delivered a singleton liveborn infant at term (37–40 weeks) gestation, had a prepregnancy BMI ≥30 kg/m2, and had no missing data on maternal height, prepregnancy weight, and weight at deliver Birth certificate data from the 2014 United States (US) Natality Files Total n of samples = 3998076; 289206 (150189 gained within; 86928 gained below; 52089 weight loss); total n of obese women = 642096 Obese Class I: 355923 Measured Maternal age, maternal education, marital status, parity, medical insurance, maternal race, prepregnancy diabetes, and gestational diabetes, and smoking OR 1.41 (1.16–1.7)
Obese Class I
1.25 (1.09–1.43)
Obese Class II: 169000 Obese Class II
1.26 (1.07–1.5)
Obese Class III: 117173 Obese Class III
1.19 (0.93–1.52)
Sellner et al. (2021) [8] United States 9/2013–8/2017 Retrospective cohort study 1428 women with prepregnancy BMI ≥30 kg/m2 who received prenatal care at a large Medicaid clinic Electronic medical record in Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Baylor college of Medicine Total n of samples = 890; 416 (176 gained within; 161 gained below; 79 weight loss); total n of obese women = 890 Obese Class I: 484 Measured Age, race/ethnicity, nutritional education, participation in group prenatal care, and medical conditions OR 1.35 (0.94–1.93)
Obese Class I
2.53 (1.04–6.16)
Obese cClass II: 218 Obese Class II
1.28 (0.36–4.6)
Obese Class III: 188 Obese Class III
1.49 (0.26–8.45)
Shin et al. (2015) [41] United States 2004–2011 Retrospective cohort study Women from the PRAMS (an ongoing surveillance project of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and state health departments of 40 U.S. states and New York City) Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) Total n of samples = 219868; total n of obese women = 42963 NR NR Maternal age; gestational age; smoking; maternal education; family income; marital status OR 1.24 (1.13–1.37)
Simas et al. (2012) [42] United States 4/2006–3/2010 Retrospective cohort study Women who delivered singleton, live birth, and nonanomalous neonates University of Massachusetts (UMass) Memorial Healthcare automated electronic labour and delivery data Total n of samples = 11203; 882 (424 gained within; 458 gained below guidelines); total n of obese women = 2313 NR (1) Self-reported prepregnancy weight as recorded in the woman's pre natal record, (2) weight self-reported by the women upon admission for delivery, (3) measured weight at first prenatal visit as recorded in her prenatal record Diabetes; marital status; hypertension; parity; race/ethnicity and smoking OR 1.07 (0.9–1.28)
Tucker et al. (2021) [43] Florida, USA 7/2013–12/2017 Retrospective cohort study Patients who delivered a singleton at term (>37 weeks and 0 days) with a BMI >40 kg/m2 Electronic medical record in Duke University Hospital or Duke Regional Hospital Total n of samples = 374; 230 (101 gained within; 129 gained below); total n of obese women = 374 Obese Class III: 374 Measured After controlling for entry BMI and gestational age at delivery Obese Class III
0.66 (0.26–1.66)
Vesco et al. (2011) [44] Oregon and Washington, United States 1/2000–12/2005 Retrospective cohort study Women with singleton live births ≥37 weeks, who delivered with in Kaiser Permanente Northwest with measured maternal weight between 6 months before pregnancy and 12 weeks; measured weight within the 2 weeks before delivery; documented height Electronic medical records in Kaiser Permanente Northwest Total n of samples = 12076 887 (513 gained within; 374 gained below guidelines); total n of obese women = 2080 NR Measured Parity; maternal age; gestational age at delivery; tobacco use during the last trimester of pregnancy; Medicaid enrollment OR 2.87 (1.18–6.99)
Wilkins et al. (2022) [45] United States 2009–2012 Retrospective cohort study Singleton pregnancies >35 weeks with prepregnancy obesity Kaiser Permanente Northern California Total n of samples = 17563; total n of obese women = 17563 Obese Class I: 2459 NR Age, race, parity, gestational weeks, start of prenatal care, pregestational diabetes, GDM, neonate, education, substance use, prepregnancy BMl, rior chronic hypertension, and hypertension in pregnancy OR 1.94 (1.39–2.71)
Obese Class I
1.7 (0.81–3.59)
Obese Class II: 3688 Obese Class II
1.`66 (1.13–2.46)
Obese Class III: 4742 Obese Class III
2.85 (1.59–5.09)
Open in a new tab

NR, not report.

2.4. Statistical Analysis

The multivariate-adjusted odds ratio (OR) and corresponding 95% CI reported in the studies were used to produce forest plots in our meta-analysis. Data were statistically analyzed using RevMan 5.3 software, and measured values were quantified using the weighted mean difference (WMD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity among different studies was quantified using I2. Heterogeneity was deemed statistically significant and insignificant when I2 values were >50% or ≤50%, respectively, and analyzed using random and fixed effects models, respectively. The reasons for heterogeneity were explored using subgroup analyses. Publication bias was quantified using funnel plots and Egger tests. Values with P < 0.05 were considered statistically significant, suggesting that publication bias was not excluded. Sensitivity analysis for outcome was performed for three groups of obese people (I: BMI 30–34.9 kg/m2, II: BMI 35–39.9 kg/m2, and III: BMI ≥ 40 kg/m2) to examine the effects of obesity and SGA.

3. Results

3.1. Literature Search

The process of study identification and inclusion, and the reasons for exclusion are presented in Figure 1. A total of 788 studies were identified by the search. Following the removal of duplicates, 684 titles and abstracts were screened. Eighty-three studies were selected for full-text review, and 29 studies [8, 16, 17, 20–45], involving 1242420 obese pregnancies, met our eligibility criteria and were included in the systematic review. The kappa coefficient of agreement for included studies between the reviewers (LJ and LBY) was 0.99.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

Flow of studies identified and included in the current meta-analysis.

3.2. Study Characteristics

We got 29 articles [8, 16, 17, 20–45] including prospective [17, 29] and retrospective cohort studies [8, 16, 20–28, 30–45], built into our meta-analysis. The included studies reported on at least 1242420 obese pregnant women. At least 175247(14.11%) obese women were weight loss (<0 kg) and inadequate weight (0–4.9 kg) during the pregnancy compared with the recommendations of IOM guidelines. Twenty studies were American [8, 22–25, 27–31, 33, 34, 36, 37, 40–45], one was Japanese [32], one was from Lebanon [26], and seven were in Europe [16, 17, 20, 21, 35, 38, 39]. All but fifteen studies [8, 20, 21, 23, 24, 27, 28, 31, 33, 37–40, 45] investigated outcomes according to three groups of obese people. In addition, twenty-six studies [8, 16, 17, 20–22, 24–38, 40–42, 44, 45] also investigated outcomes for overall obesity except for three studies [23, 39, 43]. Eleven studies [8, 21, 22, 24, 28, 31–34, 40, 45] investigated outcomes for obese women who weight loss (<0 kg), and reported outcomes for obese women who inadequate weight (0–4.9 kg). Table 1 provides detailed information.

3.3. Quality Score

One study scored two points, three scored three points, six scored four points, twelve scored five points, and the others scored six points. The articles scoring below or equal to four points were regarded as “low quality” and would be subsequently involved in the sensitivity analysis (Table 2).

Table 2.

Quality assessment of included studies using the modified Newcastle–Ottawa scale in systematic review of gestational weight gain below compared with within the 2009 Institute of Medicine Guideline in obese women and SGA.

Study Modified Newcastle–Ottawa scale
Selection Comparability of cohorts (maximum: 2) Outcome assessment of outcomes (maximum: 1) Overall scores
Representativeness of exposed cohorts (maximum: 1) Selection of nonexposed cohorts (maximum: 1) Ascertainment of exposures (maximum: 1)
Wilkins et al. (2022) [45] 1 1 1 2 1 6
Tucker et al. (2021) [43] 1 1 1 1 1 5
Sellner et al. (2021) [8] 0 1 0 1 1 3
Robillard et al. (2021) [38] 1 1 1 0 0 3
Class et al. (2021) [23] 0 1 0 1 1 4
Salmon et al. (2020) [40] 1 1 1 2 1 6
Mission et al. (2020) [34] 1 1 1 2 1 6
Devlieger et al. (2020) [16] 1 1 1 1 1 5
Roussel et al. (2019) [39] 0 1 0 2 1 4
Feghali et al. (2019) [27] 1 1 1 1 1 4
Nowak et al. (2019) [35] 0 1 1 1 1 4
Hirooka-Nakama et al. (2018) [32] 0 1 0 2 1 4
Hannaford et al. (2017) [29] 1 1 1 1 1 5
Durst et al. (2016) [25] 1 1 1 1 1 5
Cox Bauer et al. (2016) [22] 1 1 1 1 1 5
El Rafei et al. (2016) [26] 1 1 0 2 1 5
Shin et al. (2015) [41] 1 1 0 2 1 5
Bogaerts et al. (2015) [21] 1 1 0 2 1 5
Gavard et al. (2014) [28] 1 1 0 2 1 5
Haugen et al. (2014) [17] 1 1 0 2 1 5
Oza-Frank et al. (2013) [36] 1 1 0 2 1 5
Simas et al. (2012) [42] 0 1 0 2 1 4
Vesco et al. (2011) [44] 0 1 1 2 1 5
Park et al. (2011) [37] 1 1 1 2 1 6
Durie et al. (2011) [24] 1 1 1 2 1 6
Harper et al. (2011) [30] 1 0 1 1 0 3
Beyerlein et al. (2011) [20] 1 1 1 2 1 6
Hinkle et al. (2010) [31] 1 0 1 0 0 2
Open in a new tab

3.4. Outcomes

3.4.1. Primary Outcomes

Obese women who gained weight below the guideline recommendations had a higher risk of SGA than women who gained weight within the guidelines (OR = 1.27, 95% CI = 1.16–1.38, Z = 5.36, P < 0.00001; 26 studies). Heterogeneity as defined by the I2 statistics was high (I2 = 59%, P < 0.0001); therefore, a random effect model was used for the analysis (Figure 2). In obese women, weight loss (<0 kg) and inadequate weight (0–4.9 kg) during pregnancy were associated with an increased risk of SGA. (OR = 1.50, 95% CI = 1.37–1.64, Z = 8.82, P < 0.00001; 11 studies) (OR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.14–1.23, Z = 8.06, P < 0.00001; 11 studies), as shown in Figures 3 and 4.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

Forest plot of the association between weight gain below the guidelines in obese women and SGA.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Open in a new tab

Forest plot of the association between weight loss in obese women and SGA.

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Open in a new tab

Forest plot of the association between inadequate weight in obese women and SGA.

Data from each class group showed the differences between the obese women who gained weight below the guidelines and those who gained weight within. Class I (OR = 1.38, 95% CI = 1.29–1.47, Z = 9.94, P < 0.00001; 14 studies); Class II (OR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.30–1.49, Z = 9.08, P < 0.00001; 15 studies) Class III (OR = 1.26, 95% CI = 1.16–1.37, Z = 5.53, P < 0.00001; 14 studies) (Figure 5)

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Open in a new tab

Forest plot of the association between weight gain below the guidelines in obese women of each class group and SGA.

The same results were identified by Class I, Class II, and Class III of obese women who weight loss (<0 kg) and inadequate weight (0–4.9 kg) during pregnancy (Figure 6). In addition, we found that gestational weight loss (<0 kg) was associated with an increased risk for SGA (OR = 1.49, 95% CI = 1.33–1.66, Z = 6.85, P < 0.00001; 5 studies), as compared with inadequate weight (0–4.9 kg) (Figures 7 and 8).

Figure 6.

Figure 6

Open in a new tab

Forest plot of weight loss and inadequate weight with SGA for obese women of each class group. (a) Weight loss. (b) Weight inadequately.

Figure 7.

Figure 7

Open in a new tab

Forest plot of weight loss and inadequate weight with SGA for obese women.

Figure 8.

Figure 8

Open in a new tab

Forest plot of weight loss and inadequate weight with SGA for obese women of each class group.

3.4.2. Subgroup Analysis

The results of subgroup analysis by countries showed that GWG below guidelines in obese women were associated with risk for SGA: USA (OR = 1.30, 95% CI = 1.15–1.46, Z = 4.27, P < 0.0001; 18 studies) and Europe (OR = 1.24, 95% CI = 1.11–1.40, Z = 3.68, P=0.0002; 6 studies), with no statistically significant result for Asia. (OR = 1.17; 95% CI = 0.91–1.50; Z = 1.26, P=0.21; 2 studies) (Figure 9).

Figure 9.

Figure 9

Open in a new tab

Forest plot of the association between weight gain below the guidelines in obese women of each country and SGA.

3.4.3. Sensitivity Analyses and Publication Bias

Sensitivity analysis was used to evaluate the stability of the results. The sensitivity analysis indicated, compared with the original pooled OR, excluding the ten studies assessed as “low quality” also resulted in a similar (OR = 1.31; 95% CI = 1.25–1.38; Z = 10.37, P < 0.00001).

No more evidence of publication bias showed in the funnel plots for the overall obesity, weight loss, and inadequate weight group (Figure 10).

Figure 10.

Figure 10

Open in a new tab

Funnel plots for effect of weight gain below the guidelines with SGA for overall obesity, inadequate weight, and weight loss.

4. Discussion

Our meta-analysis demonstrates that obese women who gained weight below the guideline recommendations had more risks of SGA than those of gained weight within the guidelines. These data covered not only the population of overall obese women but all three classes of obesity of pregnant women. These results were similar to prior systematic reviews [9–11, 46]. However, these studies did not account for the differing socioeconomic, lifestyle, and racial backgrounds of patients. The repercussions of weight loss in obese gravida may varied based on race and socioeconomic classes, so studying these topics in diverse patient populations was important. Moreover, in our study, we also evaluated gestational weight loss in obese pregnant women was associated with an increases risk for SGA, compared with inadequate weight (0–4.9 kg). Of the 29 articles we selected, only five provided detailed information on the number of pregnancies at risk of weight loss (<0 kg) and inadequate weight (0–4.9 kg) for SGA. Therefore, our study added a subgroup analysis of race and found that obese women who gain weight below the guideline in the United States and Europe were associated with a higher risk for SGA, but not in Asia because the USA and Europe had the greatest prevalence of overweight and obesity [47, 48]. Asia women were more likely to be underweight than those in the USA and Europe [32].

Obesity during pregnancy is associated with a myriad of adverse outcomes such as preeclampsia, labour induction, postpartum haemorrhage, cesarean delivery, and preterm birth [49, 50]. Therefore, more obese women in the USA and Europe attempted to lose weight during pregnancy [51]. Our study also analyzed that not only weight loss (<0 kg) but also inadequate weight (0–4.9 kg) in obese pregnant women were associated with an increased risk of SGA. Our findings in these meta-analyses were also in line with the findings of a previous meta-analysis [10, 11]. Moreover, our results were identified by Class I, Class II, and Class III of obese women. The mechanism of weight gain within the guideline range during pregnancy contributes to SGA may be that the lack of maternal nutrition can lead to the placental vascular development change and barrier thickness increases, thus resulting in reduced glucose, amino acid, and lipid transport, as well as chronic hypoxia, which ultimately affected the fetus normal growth and development process.

4.1. Strength and Limitations

The strength of this systematic review included the comprehensiveness of the search strategies in three databases. We performed a careful quality assessment using a modified Newcastle–Ottawa scale. Sensitivity analyses corroborated the robustness of our findings and argued in favour of their validity. Importantly, we addressed the evidence for each obesity class. All included studies were adjusted for multiple important confounders, and all but ten studies were of high quality.

However, this meta-analysis has several limitations. First, it lacked studies from developing countries. The studies that met our inclusion criteria originated predominantly from United States. Hence, more research is needed from diverse populations to be able to generalize our findings. Second, some variables may also have influenced findings, such as maternal ethnicity, behavioral factors (diet, physical activity, and smoking), socioeconomic status, and women with prenatal complications, although some studies did adjust for these variables or excluded women with preexisting complications from their analysis. Third, the limits are related to the precision of self-reported GWG, the no possibility to obtain data on the dietary advice and dietary compliance of the women and on the long-term outcomes of neonates.

5. Conclusions

Our findings indicated that obese pregnant women who weight loss (<0 kg) and inadequate weight (0–4.9 kg) below the IOM guideline had increased risks for SGA. Therefore, the clinical focus should intensify efforts to assist obese women to achieve GWG within the IOM guidelines to decrease the risk for SGA. We also found that gestational weight loss in these pregnancies was associated with an increased risk for SGA compared with weight inadequate. These findings underline the importance considering the IOM guidelines in terms of gestational weight gain taking into consideration the different classifications of obese women.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Medical Science Research Project of Hebei Provincial Health Commission of China (Grant number 20220802).

Data Availability

The data described in this article can be freely and openly accessed from the original published articles in the database.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Authors' Contributions

Wen Chen, Beiyi Li, Kexin Gan, Jing Liu, Yajing Yang, and Xiuqin Lv contributed substantially to the concept and design of the study, performed data collection or analysis, and interpreted the data. The authors revised important substantive content. Wen Chen, Jing Liu, and Huijuan Ma have read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary Materials

Table S1: summary of the medical search strategy for this article.

Click here for additional data file. (41.8KB, pdf)

References

  • 1.McIntyre H. D., Catalano P., Zhang C., Desoye G., Mathiesen E. R., Damm P. Gestational diabetes mellitus. Nature Reviews Disease Primers . 2019;5(1):p. 47. doi: 10.1038/s41572-019-0098-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Catalano P. M., Shankar K. Obesity and pregnancy: mechanisms of short term and long term adverse consequences for mother and child. BMJ . 2017;356:p. j1. doi: 10.1136/bmj.j1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Poston L., Caleyachetty R., Cnattingius S., et al. Preconceptional and maternal obesity: epidemiology and health consequences. Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology . 2016;4(12):1025–1036. doi: 10.1016/s2213-8587(16)30217-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Institute of M., National Research Council Committee to Reexamine Iompwg . The national academies collection: reports funded by national institutes of health. In: Rasmussen K. M., Yaktine A. L., editors. Weight Gain during Pregnancy: Reexamining the Guidelines . Washington (DC), WA, USA: National Academies Press (US); 1975. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Bish C. L., Chu S. Y., Shapiro-Mendoza C. K., Sharma A. J., Blanck H. M. Trying to lose or maintain weight during pregnancy-United States, 2003. Maternal and Child Health Journal . 2009;13(2):286–292. doi: 10.1007/s10995-008-0349-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Blomberg M. Maternal and neonatal outcomes among obese women with weight gain below the new Institute of Medicine recommendations. Obstetrics & Gynecology . 2011;117(5):1065–1070. doi: 10.1097/aog.0b013e318214f1d1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Bodnar L. M., Siega-Riz A. M., Simhan H. N., Himes K. P., Abrams B. Severe obesity, gestational weight gain, and adverse birth outcomes. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition . 2010;91(6):1642–1648. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.2009.29008. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Sellner A. A., Garbarino A. H., Miao D., Hollier L. M., Ratan B. M. Effects of gestational weight gain on delivery outcomes in an obese, low-income population. Southern Medical Journal . 2021;114(11):686–691. doi: 10.14423/smj.0000000000001320. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Xu Z., Wen Z., Zhou Y., Li D., Luo Z. Inadequate weight gain in obese women and the risk of small for gestational age (SGA): a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine . 2017;30(3):357–367. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2016.1173029. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Kapadia M. Z., Park C. K., Beyene J., Giglia L., Maxwell C., McDonald S. D. Weight loss instead of weight gain within the guidelines in obese women during pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analyses of maternal and infant outcomes. PLoS One . 2015;10(7) doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0132650.e0132650 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Kapadia M. Z., Park C. K., Beyene J., Giglia L., Maxwell C., McDonald S. D. Can we safely recommend gestational weight gain below the 2009 guidelines in obese women? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Obesity Reviews . 2015;16(3):189–206. doi: 10.1111/obr.12238. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Faucher M. A., Barger M. K. Gestational weight gain in obese women by class of obesity and select maternal/newborn outcomes: a systematic review. Women and Birth . 2015;28(3):e70–e79. doi: 10.1016/j.wombi.2015.03.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Zhao H., Song A., Zhang Y., Zhen Y., Song G., Ma H. The association between birth weight and the risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Endocrine Journal . 2018;65(9):923–933. doi: 10.1507/endocrj.ej18-0072. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Feng C., Osgood N. D., Dyck R. F. Low birth weight, cumulative obesity dose, and the risk of incident type 2 diabetes. Journal of Diabetes Research . 2018;2018:9. doi: 10.1155/2018/8435762.8435762 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Tudehope D., Vento M., Bhutta Z., Pachi P. Nutritional requirements and feeding recommendations for small for gestational age infants. The Journal of Pediatrics . 2013;162(3):S81–S89. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2012.11.057. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Devlieger R., Ameye L., Nuyts T., Goemaes R., Bogaerts A. Reappraisal of gestational weight gain recommendations in obese pregnant women: a population-based study of 337, 590 births. Obesity Facts . 2020;13(4):333–348. doi: 10.1159/000508975. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Haugen M., Brantsæter A. L., Winkvist A., et al. Associations of pre-pregnancy body mass index and gestational weight gain with pregnancy outcome and postpartum weight retention: a prospective observational cohort study. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth . 2014;14(1):p. 201. doi: 10.1186/1471-2393-14-201. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Joint Fao/Who Expert Committee on Food Additives. Obesity: preventing and managing the global epidemic. Report of a WHO consultation. World Health Organization technical report series . 2000;896:1–128. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Wells G. A., Shea B., Connell D. O, et al. The newcastle-ottawa scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. 2000.
  • 20.Beyerlein A., Schiessl B., Lack N., von Kries R. Associations of gestational weight loss with birth-related outcome: a retrospective cohort study. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology . 2011;118(1):55–61. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2010.02761.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Bogaerts A., Ameye L., Martens E., Devlieger R. Weight loss in obese pregnant women and risk for adverse perinatal outcomes. Obstetrics & Gynecology . 2015;125(3):566–575. doi: 10.1097/aog.0000000000000677. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Cox Bauer C. M., Bernhard K. A., Greer D. M., Merrill D. C. Maternal and neonatal outcomes in obese women who lose weight during pregnancy. Journal of Perinatology . 2016;36(4):278–283. doi: 10.1038/jp.2015.202. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Class Q. A. Obesity and the increasing odds of cesarean delivery. Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics and Gynecology . 2021;43 doi: 10.1080/0167482X.2021.1967926. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Durie D. E., Thornburg L. L., Glantz J. C. Effect of second-trimester and third-trimester rate of gestational weight gain on maternal and neonatal outcomes. Obstetrics & Gynecology . 2011;118(3):569–575. doi: 10.1097/aog.0b013e3182289f42. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Sutton A., Cliver S., Tita A., Biggio J., Durst J. Impact of gestational weight gain on perinatal outcomes in obese women. American Journal of Perinatology . 2016;33(09):849–855. doi: 10.1055/s-0036-1579650. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.El Rafei R., Abbas H. A., Charafeddine L., et al. Association of pre-pregnancy body mass index and gestational weight gain with preterm births and fetal size: an observational study from Lebanon. Paediatric & Perinatal Epidemiology . 2016;30(1):38–45. doi: 10.1111/ppe.12249. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Feghali M. N., Catov J. M., Zantow E., Mission J., Caritis S. N., Scifres C. M. Timing of gestational weight gain and adverse perinatal outcomes in overweight and obese women. Obstetrics & Gynecology . 2019;133(5):962–970. doi: 10.1097/aog.0000000000003234. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Gavard J. A., Artal R. The association of gestational weight gain with birth weight in obese pregnant women by obesity class and diabetic status: a population-based historical cohort study. Maternal and Child Health Journal . 2014;18(4):1038–1047. doi: 10.1007/s10995-013-1356-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Tuuli M., Macones G., Odibo L., Odibo A., Hannaford K. Gestational weight gain: association with adverse pregnancy outcomes. American Journal of Perinatology . 2016;34(02):147–154. doi: 10.1055/s-0036-1584583. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Harper L. M., Chang J. J., Macones G. A. Adolescent pregnancy and gestational weight gain: do the Institute of Medicine recommendations apply? American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology . 2011;205(2):140.e1–140.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2011.03.053. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Hinkle S. N., Sharma A. J., Dietz P. M. Gestational weight gain in obese mothers and associations with fetal growth. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition . 2010;92(3):644–651. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.2010.29726. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Hirooka-Nakama J., Enomoto K., Sakamaki K., Kurasawa K., Miyagi E., Aoki S. Optimal weight gain in obese and overweight pregnant Japanese women. Endocrine Journal . 2018;65(5):557–567. doi: 10.1507/endocrj.ej18-0027. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Kominiarek M. A., Seligman N. S., Dolin C., et al. Gestational weight gain and obesity: is 20 pounds too much? American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology . 2013;209(3):214.e1–214.e11. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2013.04.035. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Mission J. F., Catov J., Comer D., et al. Perinatal outcomes associated with early diabetes testing in pregnancies complicated by obesity. American Journal of Perinatology . 2020;37(06):589–597. doi: 10.1055/s-0039-1683897. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Nowak M., Kalwa M., Oleksy P., Marszalek K., Radon-Pokracka M., Huras H. The relationship between pre-pregnancy BMI, gestational weight gain and neonatal birth weight: a retrospective cohort study. Ginekologia Polska . 2019;90(1):50–54. doi: 10.5603/gp.2019.0008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Oza-Frank R., Keim S. A. Should obese women gain less weight in pregnancy than recommended? Birth (Berkeley, Calif) . 2013;40(2):107–114. doi: 10.1111/birt.12037. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Park S., Sappenfield W. M., Bish C., Salihu H., Goodman D., Bensyl D. M. Assessment of the Institute of Medicine recommendations for weight gain during pregnancy: Florida, 2004-2007. Maternal and Child Health Journal . 2011;15(3):289–301. doi: 10.1007/s10995-010-0596-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Robillard P. Y. Epidemiological evidence that severe obese women (pre-pregnancy BMI ≥40 kg/m2) should lose weight during their pregnancy. Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine . 2021;35 doi: 10.1080/14767058.2021.1918666. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Roussel E., Touleimat S., Ollivier L., Verspyck E. Birthweight and pregnancy outcomes in obese class II women with low weight gain: a retrospective study. PLoS One . 2019;14(5) doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0215833.e0215833 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Salmon C., Sauve R. S., LeJour C., Fenton T., Metcalfe A. A single gestational weight gain recommendation is possible for all classes of pregnant women with obesity. Obesity Research & Clinical Practice . 2020;14(1):66–72. doi: 10.1016/j.orcp.2019.11.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Shin D., Song W. O. Prepregnancy body mass index is an independent risk factor for gestational hypertension, gestational diabetes, preterm labor, and small- and large-for-gestational-age infants. Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine . 2015;28(14):1679–1686. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2014.964675. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Moore Simas T. A., Waring M. E., Liao X., et al. Prepregnancy weight, gestational weight gain, and risk of growth affected neonates. Journal of Women’s Health . 2012;21(4):410–417. doi: 10.1089/jwh.2011.2810. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Tucker A. R., Brown H. L., Dotters-Katz S. K. Maternal weight gain and infant birth weight in women with class III obesity. American Journal of Perinatology . 2021;38(08):816–820. doi: 10.1055/s-0039-3402721. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Vesco K. K., Sharma A. J., Dietz P. M., et al. Newborn size among obese women with weight gain outside the 2009 institute of medicine recommendation. Obstetrics & Gynecology . 2011;117(4):812–818. doi: 10.1097/aog.0b013e3182113ae4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Wilkins E. G., Alabaster A., Greenberg M., Sperling J., Gunderson E. A new category of gestational weight gain optimizes outcomes in pregnancies with obesity. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology . 2022;226(1):S707–S708. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2021.11.1167. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Goldstein R. F., Abell S. K., Ranasinha S., et al. Association of gestational weight gain with maternal and infant outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA, the Journal of the American Medical Association . 2017;317(21):2207–2225. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.3635. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Flegal K. M., Kruszon-Moran D., Carroll M. D., Fryar C. D., Ogden C. L. Trends in obesity among adults in the United States, 2005 to 2014. JAMA . 2016;315(21):2284–2291. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.6458. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Goldstein R. F., Abell S. K., Ranasinha S., et al. Gestational weight gain across continents and ethnicity: systematic review and meta-analysis of maternal and infant outcomes in more than one million women. BMC Medicine . 2018;16(1):p. 153. doi: 10.1186/s12916-018-1128-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Cnattingius S., Villamor E., Johansson S., et al. Maternal obesity and risk of preterm delivery. JAMA . 2013;309(22):2362–2370. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.6295. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Godfrey K. M., Reynolds R. M., Prescott S. L., et al. Influence of maternal obesity on the long-term health of offspring. Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology . 2017;5(1):53–64. doi: 10.1016/s2213-8587(16)30107-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Sydsjö G., Monfils W. G., de Keyser N., Claesson I. M., Sydsjö A., Josefsson A. Effects of a weight-gain restriction programme for obese pregnant women on sickness absence and pregnancy benefits. Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care . 2013;31(2):106–110. doi: 10.3109/02813432.2012.754091. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary Materials

Table S1: summary of the medical search strategy for this article.

Click here for additional data file. (41.8KB, pdf)

Data Availability Statement

The data described in this article can be freely and openly accessed from the original published articles in the database.

Articles from International Journal of Endocrinology are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES