Cited by 486Ovarian function and disordersReproductive Health and TechnologiesObesity, Physical Activity, Diet

Obesity and time to pregnancy

Open access
Gesink Law, D.C., Maclehose, R.F., Longnecker, M.P.·2006·Human Reproduction

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Obesity may reduce fecundity. We examined the obesity-fecundity association in relation to menstrual cycle regularity, parity, smoking habits and age to gain insight into mechanisms and susceptible subgroups. METHODS: Data were provided by 7327 pregnant women enrolled in the Collaborative Perinatal Project at 12 study centres in the United States from 1959 to 1965. Prepregnancy body mass index (BMI) was analysed continuously and categorically [underweight (<18.5 kg/m2), optimal weight (18.5-24.9 kg/m2), overweight (25.0-29.9 kg/m2) and obese (>or=30.0 kg/m2)]. Adjusted fecundability odds ratios (FORs) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards modelling for discrete time data. RESULTS: Fecundity was reduced for overweight [OR=0.92, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.84, 1.01] and obese (OR=0.82, 95% CI: 0.72, 0.95) women compared with optimal weight women and was more evident for obese primiparous women (OR=0.66, 95% CI: 0.49, 0.89). Fecundity remained reduced for overweight and obese women with normal menstrual cycles. Neither smoking habits nor age modified the association. CONCLUSIONS: Obesity was associated with reduced fecundity for all subgroups of women and persisted for women with regular cycles. Our results suggest that weight loss could increase fecundity for overweight and obese women, regardless of menstrual cycle regularity, parity, smoking habits and age.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/humrep/del400

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gesink Law, D. C., Maclehose, R. F., & Longnecker, M. P.
Affiliations
National Institutes of Health (US)
Venue
Human Reproduction
Published
2006-09-27
Volume
22
Issue
2
Pages
414-420
ISSN
  • 0268-1161 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2350
OpenAlex
W2086018970
Cited by
486
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 42 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 38 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 27 · 2015: 36 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 19
FWCI
10.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Human Reproduction (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (Z01ES049016)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Ovarian function and disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Reproductive Health and Technologies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
Keywords
obesity, fecundity, time to pregnancy, pre-pregnancy body mass index, menstrual cycle regularity, parity, primiparous women, smoking, age, weight loss, Collaborative Perinatal Project
MeSH terms
Adult, Age Factors, Female, Fertility, Humans, Menstrual Cycle, Obesity, Parity, Pregnancy, Smoking, Body Mass Index

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