This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
BACKGROUND: To assess the impact of a pregnancy and postpartum culturally modified, motivationally targeted, individually tailored intervention on infant outcomes among Latinas. METHODS: We conducted a pooled analysis of 2 randomized controlled trials in Western Massachusetts: Estudio Parto (collected 2013-2017, analyzed 2018-2020, n = 203) and Proyecto Mamá (data collected 2014-2020, analyzed 2021-2022, n = 141) focused on pregnant Latinas (predominantly Puerto Rican) with abnormal glucose tolerance and prepregnancy body mass index in the overweight/obese range, respectively. Women were randomized in pregnancy to a Lifestyle Intervention (n = 167) focusing on healthy exercise and diet or to a comparison Health and Wellness Intervention (n = 177) with no mention of exercise or diet. The primary outcomes in both studies were birth weight, gestational age, birth weight-for-gestational-age z score, low birth weight, preterm birth, small-for-gestational-age, large for gestational age, macrosomia). Proyecto Mamá also assessed infant anthropometrics (ie, weight, length, sum and ratio of skin fold thickness, ponderal index) at 6 weeks of age. We used linear regression for continuous outcomes and logistic regression for dichotomous outcomes. RESULTS: In modified intent-to-treat analyses, we observed no statistically significant impact of the Lifestyle Intervention on infant outcomes or anthropometric measures. For example, there was no difference in odds of small-for-gestational-age between intervention arms (odds ratio = 1.29; 95% confidence interval, 0.60-2.76). CONCLUSIONS: In these randomized trials among pregnant Latina women, we found that a culturally modified, individually tailored Lifestyle Intervention did not lead to a significant difference in infant birth weight outcomes or anthropometric measures when compared to the Health and Wellness control arm.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Palnati et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: