The effect of prenatal balanced energy and protein supplementation on gestational weight gain: An individual participant data meta-analysis in low- and middle-income countries.

IF 9.9 1区 医学 Q1 Medicine
PLoS Medicine Pub Date : 2025-02-03 eCollection Date: 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pmed.1004523
Dongqing Wang, Uttara Partap, Enju Liu, Janaína Calu Costa, Ilana R Cliffer, Molin Wang, Sudeer Kumar Nookala, Vishak Subramoney, Brittany Briggs, Imran Ahmed, Alemayehu Argaw, Shabina Ariff, Nita Bhandari, Ranadip Chowdhury, Daniel Erchick, Armando García-Guerra, Masoumah Ghaffarpour, Giles Hanley-Cook, Lieven Huybregts, Fyezah Jehan, Fatemeh Kaseb, Nancy F Krebs, Carl Lachat, Tsering Pema Lama, Dharma S Manandhar, Elizabeth M McClure, Sophie E Moore, Ameer Muhammad, Lynnette M Neufeld, Andrew M Prentice, Amado D Quezada-Sánchez, Dominique Roberfroid, Naomi M Saville, Yasir Shafiq, Bhim P Shrestha, Bakary Sonko, Sajid Soofi, Sunita Taneja, James M Tielsch, Laéticia Céline Toe, Naser Valaei, Wafaie W Fawzi
{"title":"The effect of prenatal balanced energy and protein supplementation on gestational weight gain: An individual participant data meta-analysis in low- and middle-income countries.","authors":"Dongqing Wang, Uttara Partap, Enju Liu, Janaína Calu Costa, Ilana R Cliffer, Molin Wang, Sudeer Kumar Nookala, Vishak Subramoney, Brittany Briggs, Imran Ahmed, Alemayehu Argaw, Shabina Ariff, Nita Bhandari, Ranadip Chowdhury, Daniel Erchick, Armando García-Guerra, Masoumah Ghaffarpour, Giles Hanley-Cook, Lieven Huybregts, Fyezah Jehan, Fatemeh Kaseb, Nancy F Krebs, Carl Lachat, Tsering Pema Lama, Dharma S Manandhar, Elizabeth M McClure, Sophie E Moore, Ameer Muhammad, Lynnette M Neufeld, Andrew M Prentice, Amado D Quezada-Sánchez, Dominique Roberfroid, Naomi M Saville, Yasir Shafiq, Bhim P Shrestha, Bakary Sonko, Sajid Soofi, Sunita Taneja, James M Tielsch, Laéticia Céline Toe, Naser Valaei, Wafaie W Fawzi","doi":"10.1371/journal.pmed.1004523","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Understanding the effects of balanced energy and protein (BEP) supplements on gestational weight gain (GWG) and how the effects differ depending on maternal characteristics and the nutritional composition of the supplements will inform the implementation of prenatal BEP interventions.</p><p><strong>Methods and findings: </strong>Individual participant data from 11 randomized controlled trials of prenatal BEP supplements (N = 12,549, with 5,693 in the BEP arm and 6,856 in the comparison arm) in low- and middle-income countries were used. The primary outcomes included GWG adequacy (%) and the estimated total GWG at delivery as continuous outcomes, and severely inadequate (<70% adequacy), inadequate GWG (<90% adequacy), and excessive GWG (>125% adequacy) as binary outcomes; all variables were calculated based on the Institute of Medicine recommendations. Linear and log-binomial models were used to estimate study-specific mean differences or risk ratios (RRs), respectively, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of the effects of prenatal BEP on the GWG outcomes. The study-specific estimates were pooled using meta-analyses. Subgroup analyses were conducted by individual characteristics. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression were conducted for study-level characteristics. Compared to the comparison group, prenatal BEP led to a 6% greater GWG percent adequacy (95% CI: 2.18, 9.56; p = 0.002), a 0.59 kg greater estimated total GWG at delivery (95% CI, 0.12, 1.05; p = 0.014), a 10% lower risk of severely inadequate GWG (RR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.83, 0.99; p = 0.025), and a 7% lower risk of inadequate GWG (RR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.89, 0.97; p = 0.001). The effects of prenatal BEP on GWG outcomes were stronger in studies with a targeted approach, where BEP supplements were provided to participants in the intervention arm under specific criteria such as low body mass index or low GWG, compared to studies with an untargeted approach, where BEP supplements were provided to all participants allocated to the intervention arm.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Prenatal BEP supplements are effective in increasing GWG and reducing the risk of inadequate weight gain during pregnancy. BEP supplementation targeted toward pregnant women with undernutrition may be a promising approach to delivering the supplements.</p>","PeriodicalId":49008,"journal":{"name":"PLoS Medicine","volume":"22 2","pages":"e1004523"},"PeriodicalIF":9.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11790098/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004523","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Understanding the effects of balanced energy and protein (BEP) supplements on gestational weight gain (GWG) and how the effects differ depending on maternal characteristics and the nutritional composition of the supplements will inform the implementation of prenatal BEP interventions.

Methods and findings: Individual participant data from 11 randomized controlled trials of prenatal BEP supplements (N = 12,549, with 5,693 in the BEP arm and 6,856 in the comparison arm) in low- and middle-income countries were used. The primary outcomes included GWG adequacy (%) and the estimated total GWG at delivery as continuous outcomes, and severely inadequate (<70% adequacy), inadequate GWG (<90% adequacy), and excessive GWG (>125% adequacy) as binary outcomes; all variables were calculated based on the Institute of Medicine recommendations. Linear and log-binomial models were used to estimate study-specific mean differences or risk ratios (RRs), respectively, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of the effects of prenatal BEP on the GWG outcomes. The study-specific estimates were pooled using meta-analyses. Subgroup analyses were conducted by individual characteristics. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression were conducted for study-level characteristics. Compared to the comparison group, prenatal BEP led to a 6% greater GWG percent adequacy (95% CI: 2.18, 9.56; p = 0.002), a 0.59 kg greater estimated total GWG at delivery (95% CI, 0.12, 1.05; p = 0.014), a 10% lower risk of severely inadequate GWG (RR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.83, 0.99; p = 0.025), and a 7% lower risk of inadequate GWG (RR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.89, 0.97; p = 0.001). The effects of prenatal BEP on GWG outcomes were stronger in studies with a targeted approach, where BEP supplements were provided to participants in the intervention arm under specific criteria such as low body mass index or low GWG, compared to studies with an untargeted approach, where BEP supplements were provided to all participants allocated to the intervention arm.

Conclusions: Prenatal BEP supplements are effective in increasing GWG and reducing the risk of inadequate weight gain during pregnancy. BEP supplementation targeted toward pregnant women with undernutrition may be a promising approach to delivering the supplements.

产前平衡能量和蛋白质补充对妊娠期体重增加的影响:低收入和中等收入国家的个体参与者数据荟萃分析。
背景:了解平衡能量和蛋白质(BEP)补充剂对妊娠期体重增加(GWG)的影响,以及这种影响如何因孕产妇特征和补充剂的营养成分而异,将为产前BEP干预措施的实施提供信息。方法和研究结果:使用了来自中低收入国家11项产前BEP补充剂随机对照试验的个体参与者数据(N = 12549, BEP组5693,对照组6856)。主要结局包括GWG充分性(%)和分娩时估计的总GWG作为连续结局,严重不足(125%充分性)作为二元结局;所有变量都是根据医学研究所的建议计算的。使用线性和对数二项模型分别估计研究特定的平均差异或风险比(rr),产前BEP对GWG结局影响的95%置信区间(ci)。使用荟萃分析对特定研究的估计进行汇总。按个体特征进行亚组分析。对研究水平的特征进行亚组分析和meta回归。与对照组相比,产前BEP导致GWG百分比充分性提高6% (95% CI: 2.18, 9.56;p = 0.002),分娩时估计总GWG增加0.59 kg (95% CI, 0.12, 1.05;p = 0.014), GWG严重不足的风险降低10% (RR: 0.90;95% ci: 0.83, 0.99;p = 0.025), GWG不足的风险降低7% (RR: 0.93;95% ci: 0.89, 0.97;P = 0.001)。在有针对性的研究中,产前BEP对GWG结果的影响更强,在特定标准下,如低体重指数或低GWG,为干预组的参与者提供BEP补充剂,而在无针对性的研究中,为所有被分配到干预组的参与者提供BEP补充剂。结论:产前补充BEP可有效提高GWG,降低孕期体重增加不足的风险。针对营养不良的孕妇补充BEP可能是一种很有希望的补充方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
PLoS Medicine
PLoS Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
17.60
自引率
0.60%
发文量
227
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: PLOS Medicine is a prominent platform for discussing and researching global health challenges. The journal covers a wide range of topics, including biomedical, environmental, social, and political factors affecting health. It prioritizes articles that contribute to clinical practice, health policy, or a better understanding of pathophysiology, ultimately aiming to improve health outcomes across different settings. The journal is unwavering in its commitment to uphold the highest ethical standards in medical publishing. This includes actively managing and disclosing any conflicts of interest related to reporting, reviewing, and publishing. PLOS Medicine promotes transparency in the entire review and publication process. The journal also encourages data sharing and encourages the reuse of published work. Additionally, authors retain copyright for their work, and the publication is made accessible through Open Access with no restrictions on availability and dissemination. PLOS Medicine takes measures to avoid conflicts of interest associated with advertising drugs and medical devices or engaging in the exclusive sale of reprints.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信