IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0221971.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gestational diabetes mellitus, pre-pregnancy body mass index, and gestational weight gain as risk factors for increased fat mass in Brazilian newborns

Author

Listed:
  • Laísa R S Abreu
  • Meghan K Shirley
  • Natália P Castro
  • Verônica V Euclydes
  • Denise P Bergamaschi
  • Liania A Luzia
  • Ana M Cruz
  • Patrícia H C Rondó

Abstract

Background: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is a common complication of pregnancy. It may predispose offspring to increased fat mass (FM) and the development of obesity, however few data from Latin America exist. Objective: To investigate the influence of GDM on newborn FM in mother-newborn pairs recruited from a public maternity care center in São Paulo, Brazil. Methods: Data were collected cross-sectionally in 2013–2014 from 72 mothers diagnosed with GDM, and 211 mothers with normal glucose tolerance (NGT). Newborn FM was evaluated by air-displacement plethysmography (PEA POD), and relevant demographic and obstetric data were collected from hospital records. Associations between maternal GDM status and newborn FM were investigated by multiple linear regression analysis, with adjustment for maternal age, pre-pregnancy BMI, gestational weight gain, type of delivery, sex of the child, and gestational age. Results: FM was greater in GDM versus NGT newborns in a bivariable model (Median (IQR), GDM: 0.35 (0.3) kg vs. NGT: 0.27 (0.2) kg, p = 0.02), however GDM status was not a significant predictor of FM with adjustment for other variables. Rather, pre-pregnancy BMI (coefficient (β) 1.46; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66, 2.27), gestational weight gain (β 1.32; 95% CI 0.49, 2.15), and male sex (β -17.8; 95% CI -27.2, -8.29) predicted newborn FM. Analyzing GDM and NGT groups separately, pre-pregnancy BMI (β 6.75; 95% CI 2.36, 11.1) and gestational weight gain (β 5.64; 95% CI 1.16, 10.1) predicted FM in the GDM group, while male sex alone predicted FM in the NGT group (β -12.3; 95% CI -18.3, -6.34). Conclusions: Combined model results suggest that in our cohort, pre-pregnancy BMI and gestational weight gain are more important risk factors for increased neonatal FM than GDM. However, group-specific model results suggest that GDM status may contribute to variation in the relationship between maternal/offspring factors and FM. Our use of a binary GDM variable in the combined model may have precluded clearer results on this point. Prospective cohort studies including data on maternal pre-pregnancy BMI, GWG, and glycemic profile are needed to better understand associations among these variables and their relative influence on offspring FM.

Suggested Citation

  • Laísa R S Abreu & Meghan K Shirley & Natália P Castro & Verônica V Euclydes & Denise P Bergamaschi & Liania A Luzia & Ana M Cruz & Patrícia H C Rondó, 2019. "Gestational diabetes mellitus, pre-pregnancy body mass index, and gestational weight gain as risk factors for increased fat mass in Brazilian newborns," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(8), pages 1-15, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0221971
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0221971
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0221971
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0221971&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0221971?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. van Buuren, Stef & Groothuis-Oudshoorn, Karin, 2011. "mice: Multivariate Imputation by Chained Equations in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 45(i03).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Noémi Kreif & Richard Grieve & Iván Díaz & David Harrison, 2015. "Evaluation of the Effect of a Continuous Treatment: A Machine Learning Approach with an Application to Treatment for Traumatic Brain Injury," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(9), pages 1213-1228, September.
    2. Abhilash Bandam & Eedris Busari & Chloi Syranidou & Jochen Linssen & Detlef Stolten, 2022. "Classification of Building Types in Germany: A Data-Driven Modeling Approach," Data, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-23, April.
    3. Boonstra Philip S. & Little Roderick J.A. & West Brady T. & Andridge Rebecca R. & Alvarado-Leiton Fernanda, 2021. "A Simulation Study of Diagnostics for Selection Bias," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 37(3), pages 751-769, September.
    4. Christopher J Greenwood & George J Youssef & Primrose Letcher & Jacqui A Macdonald & Lauryn J Hagg & Ann Sanson & Jenn Mcintosh & Delyse M Hutchinson & John W Toumbourou & Matthew Fuller-Tyszkiewicz &, 2020. "A comparison of penalised regression methods for informing the selection of predictive markers," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-14, November.
    5. Liangyuan Hu & Lihua Li, 2022. "Using Tree-Based Machine Learning for Health Studies: Literature Review and Case Series," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-13, December.
    6. Norah Alyabs & Sy Han Chiou, 2022. "The Missing Indicator Approach for Accelerated Failure Time Model with Covariates Subject to Limits of Detection," Stats, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-13, May.
    7. Feldkircher, Martin, 2014. "The determinants of vulnerability to the global financial crisis 2008 to 2009: Credit growth and other sources of risk," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 19-49.
    8. Ida Kubiszewski & Kenneth Mulder & Diane Jarvis & Robert Costanza, 2022. "Toward better measurement of sustainable development and wellbeing: A small number of SDG indicators reliably predict life satisfaction," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(1), pages 139-148, February.
    9. Georges Steffgen & Philipp E. Sischka & Martha Fernandez de Henestrosa, 2020. "The Quality of Work Index and the Quality of Employment Index: A Multidimensional Approach of Job Quality and Its Links to Well-Being at Work," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-31, October.
    10. Christopher Kath & Florian Ziel, 2018. "The value of forecasts: Quantifying the economic gains of accurate quarter-hourly electricity price forecasts," Papers 1811.08604, arXiv.org.
    11. Esef Hakan Toytok & Sungur Gürel, 2019. "Does Project Children’s University Increase Academic Self-Efficacy in 6th Graders? A Weak Experimental Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-12, February.
    12. J M van Niekerk & M C Vos & A Stein & L M A Braakman-Jansen & A F Voor in ‘t holt & J E W C van Gemert-Pijnen, 2020. "Risk factors for surgical site infections using a data-driven approach," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-14, October.
    13. Joost R. Ginkel, 2020. "Standardized Regression Coefficients and Newly Proposed Estimators for $${R}^{{2}}$$R2 in Multiply Imputed Data," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 85(1), pages 185-205, March.
    14. Lara Jehi & Xinge Ji & Alex Milinovich & Serpil Erzurum & Amy Merlino & Steve Gordon & James B Young & Michael W Kattan, 2020. "Development and validation of a model for individualized prediction of hospitalization risk in 4,536 patients with COVID-19," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-15, August.
    15. Matthew Carli & Mary H. Ward & Catherine Metayer & David C. Wheeler, 2022. "Imputation of Below Detection Limit Missing Data in Chemical Mixture Analysis with Bayesian Group Index Regression," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-17, January.
    16. Gerko Vink & Laurence E. Frank & Jeroen Pannekoek & Stef Buuren, 2014. "Predictive mean matching imputation of semicontinuous variables," Statistica Neerlandica, Netherlands Society for Statistics and Operations Research, vol. 68(1), pages 61-90, February.
    17. Tsai, Tsung-Han, 2016. "A Bayesian Approach to Dynamic Panel Models with Endogenous Rarely Changing Variables," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(3), pages 595-620, September.
    18. Debra Javeline & Tracy Kijewski-Correa & Angela Chesler, 2019. "Does it matter if you “believe” in climate change? Not for coastal home vulnerability," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 155(4), pages 511-532, August.
    19. Simon Grund & Oliver Lüdtke & Alexander Robitzsch, 2018. "Multiple Imputation of Missing Data at Level 2: A Comparison of Fully Conditional and Joint Modeling in Multilevel Designs," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 43(3), pages 316-353, June.
    20. Svenja Meyn & Simon Blaschke & Filip Mess, 2022. "Food Literacy and Dietary Intake in German Office Workers: A Longitudinal Intervention Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-17, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0221971. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.