CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 210Maternal and fetal healthcareGestational Diabetes Research and ManagementObesity, Physical Activity, Diet

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 38 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Association Between Prepregnancy Body Mass Index and Severe Maternal Morbidity

Open access
Lisonkova, Sarka, Muraca, Giulia M., Potts, Jayson, Liauw, Jessica, Chan, Wee-Shian, Skoll, Amanda, Lim, Kenneth I.·2017·JAMA
DOI 10.1001/jama.2017.16191PMC PMC5820710
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Importance: Although high body mass index (BMI) is associated with adverse birth outcomes, the association with severe maternal morbidity is unclear. Objective: To examine the association between prepregnancy BMI and severe maternal morbidity. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective population-based cohort study including all singleton hospital births in Washington State, 2004-2013. Demographic data and morbidity diagnoses were obtained from linked birth certificates and hospitalization files. Exposures: Prepregnancy BMI (weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) categories included underweight (<18.5), normal BMI (18.5-24.9), overweight (25.0-29.9), obesity class 1 (30.0-34.9), obesity class 2 (35.0-39.9), and obesity class 3 (≥40). Main Outcomes and Measures: Composite severe maternal morbidity or mortality included life-threatening conditions and conditions leading to serious sequelae (eg, amniotic fluid embolism, hysterectomy), complications requiring intensive care unit admission, and maternal death. Logistic regression was used to obtain adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and adjusted rate differences with 95% confidence intervals, adjusted for confounders (eg, maternal age and parity). Results: Overall, 743 630 women were included in the study (mean age, 28.1 [SD, 6.0] years; 41.4% nulliparous). Prepregnancy BMI was distributed as follows: underweight, 3.2%; normal weight, 47.5%; overweight, 25.8%; obesity class 1, 13.1%; obesity class 2, 6.2%; and obesity class 3, 4.2%. Rates of severe maternal morbidity or mortality were 171.5, 143.2, 160.4, 167.9, 178.3 and 202.9 per 10 000 women, respectively. Adjusted ORs were 1.2 (95% CI, 1.0-1.3) for underweight women; 1.1 (95% CI, 1.1-1.2) for overweight women; 1.1 (95% CI, 1.1-1.2) for women with class 1 obesity; 1.2 (95% CI, 1.1-1.3) for women with class 2 obesity; and 1.4 (95% CI, 1.3-1.5) for women with class 3 obesity compared with women with normal BMI. Absolute risk increases (adjusted rate differences per 10 000 women, compared with women with normal BMI) were 28.8 (95% CI, 12.2-47.2) for underweight women, 17.6 (95% CI, 10.5-25.1) for overweight women, 24.9 (95% CI, 15.7-34.6) for women with class 1 obesity, 35.8 (95% CI, 23.1-49.5) for women with class 2 obesity, and 61.1 (95% CI, 44.8-78.9) for women with class 3 obesity. Conclusions and Relevance: Among pregnant women in Washington State, low and high prepregnancy BMI, compared with normal BMI, were associated with a statistically significant but small absolute increase in severe maternal morbidity or mortality.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2017.16191

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 38 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 210

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Lisonkova, S., Muraca, G. M., Potts, J., Liauw, J., Chan, W.-S., Skoll, A., & Lim, K. I.
Affiliations
University of British Columbia (CA)
Corresponding author
Lisonkova, Sarka
ORCID
Venue
JAMA
Publisher
American Medical Association (AMA)
Published
2017-11-14
Volume
318
Issue
18
Pages
1777
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
DOI
10.1001/jama.2017.16191
PMC
PMC5820710
OpenAlex
W2769427421
Cited by
210
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 1
FWCI
20.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JAMA (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Maternal and fetal healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Gestational Diabetes Research and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Keywords
pre-pregnancy body mass index, severe maternal morbidity, maternal mortality, maternal obesity, maternal underweight, maternal overweight, amniotic fluid embolism, hysterectomy, intensive care unit admission, singleton births, Washington State, maternal outcomes, parity, maternal age, hospital birth, birth certificates, hospitalization records, health disparities, health equity
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Female, Humans, Maternal Mortality, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Complications, Retrospective Studies, Risk Factors, Thinness, Washington, Body Mass Index, Logistic Models, Overweight, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review