Emily Han1,2, Barbara Abrams2, Sneha Sridhar1, Fei Xu1, Monique Hedderson1. 1. Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, CA. 2. Division of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, CA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Self-reported weight prior to pregnancy is prone to error. We utilised a measured pre-conceptional weight from the electronic health record (EHR) to investigate error in recalled pre-pregnancy body mass index (BMI) category and compared how associations between pre-pregnancy BMI and pregnancy outcomes varied by using the two measures. METHODS: We assessed differences in means, correlations, and categorisation of pre-pregnancy BMI for 5092 singleton pregnancies delivered between 2007 and 2013 in Kaiser Permanente Northern California. Associations between measured and self-reported BMI category and gestational diabetes, infant size for gestational age, and exceeding the Institute of Medicine gestational weight gain recommendations were assessed. RESULTS: Overall, the two measures assigned the same BMI category for 86.7% of women with higher risks of misclassification for overweight (Relative Risk (RR) 3.38, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 2.79, 4.10), obese class I (RR 3.81, 95% CI 3.07, 4.75), and obese class II (RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.28, 2.55) women compared to normal weight women. However, associations between self-reported or measured BMI category and several pregnancy outcomes were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Despite misclassification, self-reported and measured pre-pregnancy weights were similarly associated with perinatal outcomes in this study population. Our results illustrate the value of the EHR for recording measured pre-pregnancy weight for use in research.
BACKGROUND: Self-reported weight prior to pregnancy is prone to error. We utilised a measured pre-conceptional weight from the electronic health record (EHR) to investigate error in recalled pre-pregnancy body mass index (BMI) category and compared how associations between pre-pregnancy BMI and pregnancy outcomes varied by using the two measures. METHODS: We assessed differences in means, correlations, and categorisation of pre-pregnancy BMI for 5092 singleton pregnancies delivered between 2007 and 2013 in Kaiser Permanente Northern California. Associations between measured and self-reported BMI category and gestational diabetes, infant size for gestational age, and exceeding the Institute of Medicine gestational weight gain recommendations were assessed. RESULTS: Overall, the two measures assigned the same BMI category for 86.7% of women with higher risks of misclassification for overweight (Relative Risk (RR) 3.38, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 2.79, 4.10), obese class I (RR 3.81, 95% CI 3.07, 4.75), and obese class II (RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.28, 2.55) women compared to normal weight women. However, associations between self-reported or measured BMI category and several pregnancy outcomes were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Despite misclassification, self-reported and measured pre-pregnancy weights were similarly associated with perinatal outcomes in this study population. Our results illustrate the value of the EHR for recording measured pre-pregnancy weight for use in research.
Authors: Teresa Monjardino; Ana Henriques; Carla Moreira; Teresa Rodrigues; Nuno Adubeiro; Luísa Nogueira; Cyrus Cooper; Ana Cristina Santos; Raquel Lucas Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2018-11-06 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Jessica Galin; Barbara Abrams; Stephanie A Leonard; Ellicott C Matthay; Dana E Goin; Jennifer Ahern Journal: Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol Date: 2016-12-06 Impact factor: 3.980
Authors: J L Hollis; S R Crozier; H M Inskip; C Cooper; K M Godfrey; N C Harvey; C E Collins; S M Robinson Journal: Int J Obes (Lond) Date: 2017-03-24 Impact factor: 5.095
Authors: Hanna Lagström; Samuli Rautava; Helena Ollila; Anne Kaljonen; Olli Turta; Johanna Mäkelä; Chloe Yonemitsu; Julia Gupta; Lars Bode Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2020-04-01 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Stephanie A Leonard; Barbara Abrams; Elliott K Main; Deirdre J Lyell; Suzan L Carmichael Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2020-04-01 Impact factor: 7.045