Cited by 174Vitamin D Research StudiesBirth, Development, and HealthGestational Diabetes Research and Management

Maternal Vitamin D Status in Pregnancy Is Associated with Adiposity in the Offspring: Findings from the Southampton Women’s Survey

Open access
Crozier, Sarah R, Harvey, Nicholas C, Inskip, Hazel M, Godfrey, Keith M, Cooper, Cyrus, Robinson, Siân M·2012·The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition

Abstract

Background Low vitamin D status has been linked to adiposity, but little is known of the effects of low status in pregnancy on offspring body composition. Objective The objective was to determine how maternal vitamin D status relates to lean and fat mass of the offspring. Design The offspring of 977 pregnant women, who had serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] measured at 34 wk gestation, were followed up within 3 wk of birth and at 4 and 6 y of age for dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry assessment of lean and fat mass. Results The median maternal serum 25(OH)D concentration was 62 nmol/L (IQR: 43-89 nmol/L); 35% of the women studied had values <50 nmol/L. Lower vitamin D status was associated with lower fat mass in the offspring at birth but with greater fat mass at ages 4 and 6 y. It was not associated with lean mass at any of the ages studied. The opposing associations seen between maternal 25(OH)D (SDs) and fat mass (SDs) in the offspring at birth and at age 6 y were robust to adjustment for a range of confounding factors, including maternal BMI and weight gain in pregnancy [β (95% CI): 0.08 (0.02, 0.15) and -0.10 (-0.17, -0.02), respectively]. The key independent predictors of higher maternal vitamin D status were season of assessment and use of vitamin D supplements. Conclusions Lower maternal vitamin D status may be linked to programmed differences in offspring fat mass. The findings require replication but add to a growing evidence base for a role of vitamin D in the origins of adiposity.

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 · 10.3945/ajcn.112.037473

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • Lower prenatal vitamin D levels have been associated with differences in offspring fat mass, with some evidence suggesting lower fat mass at birth but increased adiposity by 6 years of age, independent of maternal obesity.

    “Additionally, lower prenatal vitamin D levels have been associated with differences in offspring fat mass, with some evidence suggesting lower fat mass at birth but increased adiposity by 6 years of age, independent of maternal obesity [140,145].”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 23

  1. [1]Martini L Wood R Vitamin D status and the metabolic syndrome Nutr Rev 2006 64 11 479 486 17131943
  2. [2]Young K Engelman C Langefeld C Hairston K Haffner S Bryer-Ash M Association of plasma vitamin D levels with adiposity in Hispanic and African Americans J Clin Endocr Metab 2009 94 9 3306 3313 19549738 PMC2741711
  3. [3]Rajakumar K de las Heras J Chen TC Lee S Holick MF Arslanian SA Vitamin D status, adiposity and lipids in Black American and Caucasian children J Clin Endocr Metab 2011 96 5 1560 1567 21367931 PMC3085205
  4. [4]Gilbert-Diamond D Baylin A Mora-Plazas M Marin C Arsenault JE Hughes MD Vitamin D deficiency and anthropometric indicators of adiposity in school-age children: a prospective study Am J Clin Nutr 2010 92 1446 1451 20926524 PMC3131841
  5. [5]Ochs-Balcom HM Chennamaneni R Millen AE Shields PG Marian C Trevisan M Vitamin D receptor gene polymorphisms are associated with adiposity phenotypes Am J Clin Nutr 2011 93 5 10 21048058 PMC3001595
  6. [7]Hyppönen E Boucher BJ Avoidance of vitamin D deficiency in pregnancy in the United Kingdom: the case for a unified approach in national policy Brit J Nutr 2010 104 309 314 20594390
  7. [8]Krishnaveni GV Veena SR Winder NR Hill JC Noonan K Boucher BJ Maternal vitamin D status during pregnancy and body composition and cardiovascular risk markers in Indian children: the Mysore Parthenon Study Am J Clin Nutr 2011 93 628 635 21228264 PMC3407368
  8. [9]Javaid MK Crozier SR Harvey NC Gale CR Dennison EM Boucher BJ Maternal vitamin D status during pregnancy and childhood bone mass at 9 years: a longitudinal study Lancet 2006 367 36 43 16399151
  9. [10]Pasco JA Wark JD Carlin JB Ponsonby A-L Vuillermin PJ Morley R Maternal vitamin D in pregnancy may influence not only offspring bone mass but other aspects of musculoskeletal health and adiposity Med Hypotheses 2008 71 266 269 18448261
  10. [11]Mason RS Sequeira VB Gordon-Thomson C Vitamin D: the light side of sunshine Eur J Clin Nutr 2011 doi:10.1038/ejcn.2011.105:1-8 21731037 · DOI
  11. [12]Phillips DIW Young JB Birth weight, climate at birth and the risk of obesity in adult life Int J Obesity 2000 24 281 287 10757620
  12. [13]Gale CR Robinson SM Harvey NC Javaid MK Jiang B Martyn CN Maternal vitamin D status during pregnancy and child outcomes Eur J Clin Nutr 2008 62 68 77 17311057 PMC2629513
  13. [14]Inskip HM Godfrey KM Robinson SM Law CM Barker DJP Cooper C Cohort profile: The Southampton Women’s Survey Int J Epidemiol 2006 35 1 42 48 16195252 PMC4579566
  14. [15]Institute of Medicine Weight gain during pregnancy: reexamining the guidelines 2009 The National Academies Press Washington, DC 20669500
  15. [16]Crozier SR Inskip HM Godfrey KM Cooper C Harvey NC Cole ZA Weight gain in pregnancy and childhood body composition: findings from the Southampton Women’s Survey Am J Clin Nutr 2010 91 1745 1751 20375187 PMC3091013
  16. [17]Robinson S Godfrey K Osmond C Cox V Barker D Evaluation of a food frequency questionnaire used to assess nutrient intakes in pregnant women Eur J Clin Nutr 1996 50 302 308 8735311
  17. [18]Fisk CM Crozier SR Inskip HM Godfrey KM Cooper C Robinson SM Influences on the quality of young children’s diets: the importance of maternal food choices Br J Nutr 2010 105 287 296 20807465
  18. [19]Armitage P Berry G Statistical methods in medical research 2002 Blackwell Science Ltd Oxford
  19. [21]Harvey NC Poole JR Javaid MK Dennison EM Robinson S Inskip HM Parental determinants of neonatal body composition J Clin Endocr Metab 2007 92 523 526 17105847 PMC2080689
  20. [23]Vimaleswaran KS Loos RJF Progress in the genetics of common obesity and type 2 diabetes Expert Rev Mol Med 2010 12 e7 20184785
  21. [25]Jorde R Sneve M Emaus N Figenschau Y Grimnes G Cross-sectional and longitudinal relation between serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D and body mass index: the Tromsø study Eur J Nutr 2010 49 401 407 20204652
  22. [26]Abrams SA Schanler RJ Sheng HP Evans HJ Leblanc AD Garza C Bone mineral content reflects total body calcium in neonatal miniature piglets Pediatr Res 1988 24 6 693 695 3205623
  23. [27]Brunton JA Bayley HS Atkinson SA Body composition analysis by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry compared to chemical analysis of fat, lean and bone mass in small piglets Basic Life Sci 1993 60 157 160 8110099

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Crozier, S. R., Harvey, N. C., Inskip, H. M., Godfrey, K. M., Cooper, C., & Robinson, S. M.
Affiliations
Southampton General Hospital (GB)
Venue
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-07
Volume
96
Issue
1
Pages
57-63
ISSN
0002-9165 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2105958152
Cited by
174
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 2
FWCI
9.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (NF-SI-0508-10082)
  • British Heart Foundation (SP/02/003/14542, RG/07/009/23120)
  • Versus Arthritis
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Vitamin D Research Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Birth, Development, and Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Gestational Diabetes Research and Management
Keywords
maternal vitamin D status, 25-hydroxyvitamin D, pregnancy, offspring adiposity, fat mass, lean body mass, fetal programming, developmental origins of health and disease, vitamin D supplementation, Southampton Women's Survey
MeSH terms
Calcifediol, Child, Child, Preschool, Female, Follow-Up Studies, United Kingdom, Humans, Infant, Newborn, Male, Nutrition Surveys, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Complications, Pregnancy Trimester, Third, Prospective Studies, Seasons, Severity of Illness Index, Vitamin D Deficiency, Cohort Studies, 25-Hydroxyvitamin D 2, Maternal Nutritional Physiological Phenomena, Adiposity, Overweight

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