Abstract
Importance Preterm birth (PTB), is a leading cause of child morbidity and mortality. Objective: To examine the associations of maternal pre-pregnant body mass index (BMI) with any PTB, spontaneous (SPTB) and medically indicated PTB (MPTB).
Design A meta-analysis of eight population-based datasets.
Setting Three UK datasets, two USA datasets, and one each from South Australia, Norway and Denmark, with different characteristics and sources of bias.
Participants All pregnancies resulting in a live birth or stillbirth after 24 completed gestational weeks.
Exposure Maternal pre-or early pregnancy BMI derived from self-reported or measured weight and height between 12 months pre-pregnancy and 15 weeks gestation.
Main Outcome(s) and Measures(s) Any PTB (delivery <37 completed weeks), SPTB and medically indicated PTB. Fractional polynomial multivariable logistic regression was applied to eight datasets from different high-income countries and time periods. The results were combined using a random effects meta-analysis.
Results We found non-linear associations between pre-pregnant BMI and all three outcomes, across all datasets. The adjusted risk of any PTB and MPTB was elevated at both low and high BMIs, whereas the risk of SPTB was increased at lower levels of BMI but remained low or increased only slightly with higher BMI. In the meta-analysed data, the lowest risk of any PTB was at a BMI of 24.5 kg/m2 (95% confidence interval: 23.1, 30.3), with a value of 21.3 kg/m2 (20.8, 21.9) for MPTB; for SPTB, the risk remained roughly constant above a BMI of around 25-30 kg/m2.
Conclusions and Relevance Consistency of findings across different populations, despite differences between them in the time period covered, BMI distribution, missing data and control for key confounders, highlight the importance of promoting pre-conception BMI between 21 to 30 kg/m2 to prevent MPTB and SPTB
Competing Interest Statement
DAL has received support from Roche Diagnostic and Medtronic Ltd for research unrelated to this study and that was completed more than 5 years ago. KT acted as expert witness to the High Court in England called by the UK MHRA, defendants in a case on hormonal pregnancy tests and congenital anomalies 2021/2022. All other authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Funding Statement
The study was supported by the UK Medical Research Council (MC_UU_00011/3 and MC_UU_00011/6), US National Institutes of Health (R01 DK10324), the European Research Council (669545), British Heart Foundation (AA/18/1/34219 and CH/F/20/90003), and the Norwegian Research Council Centre of Excellence funding scheme (project no: 262700). KB and CPRD data access were supported by BHF Project Grant PG/19/21/34190. GS works for Born in Bradford (BiB), which receives core infrastructure funding from the Wellcome Trust (WT101597MA), a joint grant from the UK Medical Research Council (MRC) and UK Economic and Social Science Research Council (ESRC) (MR/N024397/1) and a grant from the British Heart Foundation (CS/16/4/32482). SA BEBOLD is part funded by an Australian Health and Medical Research Council CRE (099422).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Collaborative Perinatal Project: At the time of this study there were no ethics review boards but informed consent was obtained from the women. Norwegian birth registry: The study was approved by the Regional Committee of Medical and Health Research Ethics of South/East Norway. The ethical committee provided a waiver of individual consent for this use of health register data for research in line with Norwegian legislation. Danish linked data: The processing and linkage of data were approved by the Danish Data Protection Agency (UCHP reference number:514-0230/18-3000). Ethical approval or informed consent is not required for register-based studies in Denmark. Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD): CPRD has National Research Ethics Service Committee (NRES) approval for research using the primary care and linked datasets. The CPRD study protocol was approved by the Independent Scientific Advisory Committee (ISAC protocol number 20_145R). South Australian Better Evidence Better Outcomes Linked Data (BEBOLD) platform: Approval for the BEBOLD platform was obtained from the South Australian Department of Health Human Research Ethics Committee, which included a waiver of individual consent for the use of de-identified administrative data. US National Center for Health Statistics vital statistics data: These publicly available datasets are anonymised; no ethical approval is required. Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) Databank: All proposals to use SAIL Databank data are subject to review by an independent Information Governance Review Panel (IGRP). Bradford maternity data: All data were anonymised and therefore patient consent and ethical approval was not required. This study is based in part on data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink obtained under license from the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. The data is provided by patients and collected by the NHS as part of their care and support.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
CPP and NCHS Vital Statistics data are available online. All proposals to use SAIL Databank data are subject to review by an independent Information Governance Review Panel (IGRP). Once approved, data access is via remote access to a privacy protecting safe haven. Access to CPRD data is subject to approval by the CPRD Research Data Governance (RDG) process. Our CPRD protocol was approved by the Independent Scientific Advisory Committee (ISAC; protocol number 20_145R); approval via ISAC has now been replaced by the RDG process. Perinatal data for the BEBOLD platform are provided by the South Australian Department for Health and Wellbeing. Data are only accessible by researchers who have entered into an agreement with the Data Custodian and are approved by the SA Health Human Research Ethics Committee. The Danish linked data can be made available via remote access to a privacy protecting safe haven at Statistics Denmark after application to the Research Service Center at Statistics Denmark. According to Norwegian legislation, individual-level registry data cannot be made publicly available. The data underlying this project can be accessed by direct application to the Directorate for E-Health pending the required ethical approvals from the Regional Ethical Committees for Medical and Health Research of Norway. Access to NHS data from the Bradford Royal Infirmary is subject to regulations set out by the NHS Health Research Authority.
https://www.archives.gov/research/electronic-records/nih.html
