Back

Iron status in a representative sample of US pregnant women is not associated with pre-pregnancy BMI: results from the NHANES (1999-2010) study

Gallagher, K.; Ciulei, M. A.; Ba, D.; Beck, C.; Pobee, R. A.; Gernand, A. D.; Walker, R.

2024-03-09 nutrition
10.1101/2024.03.07.24303958 medRxiv
Show abstract

Iron deficiency in pregnancy is related to many poor health outcomes, including anemia and low birth weight. A small number of previous studies have identified maternal body mass index (BMI) as potential risk factors for poor iron status. Our objective was to examine the association between pre-pregnancy BMI and iron status in a nationally representative sample of US adult women. We used data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES; 1999-2010) for pregnant women ages 18-49 years (n=1156). BMI (kg/m2) was calculated using pre-pregnancy weight (self-reported) and height (measured at examination). Iron deficiency (ID) was defined as total body iron (calculated from serum ferritin and transferrin receptor using Cooks equation) < 0 mg/kg and anemia as hemoglobin < 11 g/dL. Associations were examined using weighted Poisson regression models, adjusted for confounders (age, race/ethnicity, education, family income, and trimester). Approximately 14% of pregnant women had ID and 8% had anemia in this sample. There were no differences in the prevalence of ID or anemia in women with pre-pregnancy overweight and obesity (ID: overweight, adjusted prevalence ratio (PR)=1.28, 95%CI: 0.89-1.83; obesity, PR=0.75, 95%CI: 0.39-1.45; anemia: overweight, PR=1.08, 95%CI: 0.53-2.19; obesity, PR=0.99, 95%CI: 0.49-2.01) compared to women with a normal BMI. Findings from these US nationally representative data indicate that iron status in pregnancy does not differ by pre-pregnancy BMI. Since iron deficiency during pregnancy remains a significant public health concern, NHANES should consider measuring current iron status in upcoming cycles.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.