Andrea J Sharma1,2, Joanna E Bulkley3, Ashley B Stoneburner3, Padmavati Dandamudi3, Michael Leo3, Williams M Callaghan4, Kimberly K Vesco3,5. 1. Division of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA. AJSharma@cdc.gov. 2. U.S. Public Health Service Commissioned Corps, Atlanta, GA, USA. AJSharma@cdc.gov. 3. Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research, Portland, OR, USA. 4. Division of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA. 5. Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, OR, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Prepregnancy body mass index (BMI) and gestational weight gain (GWG) are known determinants of maternal and child health; calculating both requires an accurate measure of prepregnancy weight. We compared self-reported prepregnancy weight to measured weights to assess reporting bias by maternal and clinical characteristics. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study among pregnant women using electronic health records (EHR) data from Kaiser Permanente Northwest, a non-profit integrated health care system in Oregon and southwest Washington State. We identified women age ≥ 18 years who were pregnant between 2000 and 2010 with self-reported prepregnancy weight, ≥ 2 measured weights between ≤ 365-days-prior-to and ≤ 42-days-after conception, and measured height in their EHR. We compared absolute and relative difference between self-reported weight and two "gold-standards": (1) weight measured closest to conception, and (2) usual weight (mean of weights measured 6-months-prior-to and ≤ 42-days-after conception). Generalized-estimating equations were used to assess predictors of misreport controlling for covariates, which were obtained from the EHR or linkage to birth certificate. RESULTS: Among the 16,227 included pregnancies, close agreement (± 1 kg or ≤ 2%) between self-reported and closest-measured weight was 44% and 59%, respectively. Overall, self-reported weight averaged 1.3 kg (SD 3.8) less than measured weight. Underreporting was higher among women with elevated BMI category, late prenatal care entry, and pregnancy outcome other than live/stillbirth (p < .05). Using self-reported weight, BMI was correctly classified for 91% of pregnancies, but ranged from 70 to 98% among those with underweight or obesity, respectively. Results were similar using usual weight as gold standard. CONCLUSIONS FOR PRACTICE: Accurate measure of prepregnancy weight is essential for clinical guidance and surveillance efforts that monitor maternal health and evaluate public-health programs. Identification of characteristics associated with misreport of self-reported weight can inform understanding of bias when assessing the influence of prepregnancy BMI or GWG on health outcomes.
OBJECTIVES: Prepregnancy body mass index (BMI) and gestational weight gain (GWG) are known determinants of maternal and child health; calculating both requires an accurate measure of prepregnancy weight. We compared self-reported prepregnancy weight to measured weights to assess reporting bias by maternal and clinical characteristics. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study among pregnant women using electronic health records (EHR) data from Kaiser Permanente Northwest, a non-profit integrated health care system in Oregon and southwest Washington State. We identified women age ≥ 18 years who were pregnant between 2000 and 2010 with self-reported prepregnancy weight, ≥ 2 measured weights between ≤ 365-days-prior-to and ≤ 42-days-after conception, and measured height in their EHR. We compared absolute and relative difference between self-reported weight and two "gold-standards": (1) weight measured closest to conception, and (2) usual weight (mean of weights measured 6-months-prior-to and ≤ 42-days-after conception). Generalized-estimating equations were used to assess predictors of misreport controlling for covariates, which were obtained from the EHR or linkage to birth certificate. RESULTS: Among the 16,227 included pregnancies, close agreement (± 1 kg or ≤ 2%) between self-reported and closest-measured weight was 44% and 59%, respectively. Overall, self-reported weight averaged 1.3 kg (SD 3.8) less than measured weight. Underreporting was higher among women with elevated BMI category, late prenatal care entry, and pregnancy outcome other than live/stillbirth (p < .05). Using self-reported weight, BMI was correctly classified for 91% of pregnancies, but ranged from 70 to 98% among those with underweight or obesity, respectively. Results were similar using usual weight as gold standard. CONCLUSIONS FOR PRACTICE: Accurate measure of prepregnancy weight is essential for clinical guidance and surveillance efforts that monitor maternal health and evaluate public-health programs. Identification of characteristics associated with misreport of self-reported weight can inform understanding of bias when assessing the influence of prepregnancy BMI or GWG on health outcomes.
Authors: Mark C Hornbrook; Evelyn P Whitlock; Cynthia J Berg; William M Callaghan; Donald J Bachman; Rachel Gold; F Carol Bruce; Patricia M Dietz; Selvi B Williams Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2007-04 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Timothy L Lash; Matthew P Fox; Richard F MacLehose; George Maldonado; Lawrence C McCandless; Sander Greenland Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2014-07-30 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: A Ferrara; N S Weiss; M M Hedderson; C P Quesenberry; J V Selby; I J Ergas; T Peng; G J Escobar; D J Pettitt; D A Sacks Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2006-11-14 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Hemant K Satpathy; Alfred Fleming; Donald Frey; Michael Barsoom; Chabi Satpathy; Jimmy Khandalavala Journal: Postgrad Med Date: 2008-09-15 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Anna-Leena Orsama; Elina Mattila; Miikka Ermes; Mark van Gils; Brian Wansink; Ilkka Korhonen Journal: Obes Facts Date: 2014-01-31 Impact factor: 3.942