Comparison of two proxies for the preconception weight using data from a pre-pregnancy cohort in Benin: Weight measured in the first trimester of pregnancy vs estimated by Thomas’ formula

Accurate determination of pre-pregnancy weight is essential for optimal pregnancy monitoring and antenatal care. Determining pre-pregnancy weight in limited-resources settings is challenging for both clinical practice and public health research. From a 2014-2017 pre-pregnancy cohort in Benin, we evaluated the agreement between the measured pre-pregnancy weight (MPPW) and two proxies: (i) the first trimester pregnancy weight (FTPW) and (ii) the estimated pre-pregnancy weight (EPPW) using Thomas & al. formula. We analysed data from 302 pregnant women with both pre-pregnancy weight measured within 3 months before conception and weight measured during the first trimester. Using segmented linear regression, we first assessed up to which gestational age the weight measured during the first trimester could reasonably estimate the MPPW. Then the Bland & Altman method was used to assess agreement between MPPW and the two proxies. Additional analyses were performed to assess the sensitivity of results to the timing of measurement of either MPPW or the two proxies. On average, FTPW did not feature significant difference with MPPW up to 13.03 (11.99-14.06) weeks of gestational age. FTPW, measured on average at 7 ± 2.4 weeks of gestation, and the EPPW showed similar Bland & Altman limits of agreement with the MPPW. However, while the FTPW slightly underestimated the MPPW by a mean of-0.16 (-0.08; +0.39) kg, the EPPW overestimated it by a mean of + 0.43 (+0.20; +0.66) kg. Minor differences in these results were observed when the MPPW was assessed earlier or within three months before pregnancy, or according to the gestational age at the time of the proxy's measurement. In conclusion, in Southern Benin and up to 12-14 weeks of pregnancy, the FTPW appeared to be a good proxy of the MPPW while using Thomas' formula did not enhance pre-pregnancy weight estimation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PLoS ONE
Published
2024-11-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0312840
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Gestational Diabetes Research and Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.17

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of two proxies for the preconception weight using data from a pre-pregnancy cohort in Benin: Weight measured in the first trimester of pregnancy vs estimated by Thomas’ formula

Jules Alao, Cornélia Hounkonnou, Manfred Accrombessi, Yves Martin‐Prével et al.
2 citations
PLoS ONE
Gestational Diabetes Research and Management
1.17
article

Comparison of two proxies for the preconception weight using data from a pre-pregnancy cohort in Benin: Weight measured in the first trimester of pregnancy vs estimated by Thomas’ formula

Jules Alao, Cornélia Hounkonnou, Manfred Accrombessi, Yves Martin‐Prével, Jennifer Zeitlin, Emmanuel Yovo, Gino Agbota, Valérie Briand, Pierre Traissac
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Accurate determination of pre-pregnancy weight is essential for optimal pregnancy monitoring and antenatal care. Determining pre-pregnancy weight in limited-resources settings is challenging for both clinical practice and public health research. From a 2014-2017 pre-pregnancy cohort in Benin, we evaluated the agreement between the measured pre-pregnancy weight (MPPW) and two proxies: (i) the first trimester pregnancy weight (FTPW) and (ii) the estimated pre-pregnancy weight (EPPW) using Thomas & al. formula. We analysed data from 302 pregnant women with both pre-pregnancy weight measured within 3 months before conception and weight measured during the first trimester. Using segmented linear regression, we first assessed up to which gestational age the weight measured during the first trimester could reasonably estimate the MPPW. Then the Bland & Altman method was used to assess agreement between MPPW and the two proxies. Additional analyses were performed to assess the sensitivity of results to the timing of measurement of either MPPW or the two proxies. On average, FTPW did not feature significant difference with MPPW up to 13.03 (11.99-14.06) weeks of gestational age. FTPW, measured on average at 7 ± 2.4 weeks of gestation, and the EPPW showed similar Bland & Altman limits of agreement with the MPPW. However, while the FTPW slightly underestimated the MPPW by a mean of-0.16 (-0.08; +0.39) kg, the EPPW overestimated it by a mean of + 0.43 (+0.20; +0.66) kg. Minor differences in these results were observed when the MPPW was assessed earlier or within three months before pregnancy, or according to the gestational age at the time of the proxy's measurement. In conclusion, in Southern Benin and up to 12-14 weeks of pregnancy, the FTPW appeared to be a good proxy of the MPPW while using Thomas' formula did not enhance pre-pregnancy weight estimation.

PLoS ONEVol. 19(11)
Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement (FR), Inserm (FR), Université Paris Cité (FR), Agropolis International (FR), Institut National de Recherche pour l'Agriculture, l'Alimentation et l'Environnement (FR), Institut Agronomique Méditerranéen de Montpellier (FR), Université Sorbonne Paris Nord (FR), Sorbonne Paris Cité (FR), Mère et enfant en milieu tropical : pathogènes, système de santé et transition épidémiologique (FR), Centre National Hospitalier et Universitaire Hubert Koutoukou MAGA (BJ), Institut Agro Montpelier (FR), International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (BJ), Centre International deHautes Etudes Agronomiques Méditerranéennes (FR), Médecins Sans Frontières (FR), Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (FR), Recherches Translationnelles sur le VIH et les Maladies Infectieuses, Centre de Recherche Épidémiologie et Statistique (FR), L'Institut Agro (FR), Population Services International (ZM)
Institut de Recherche pour le Développement, Agence Nationale de la Recherche, Fondation de France
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 19%
Gestational Diabetes Research and Management
1.17
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.