Using conflict negativity to index psychological tension between impartiality and status-upholding principles.

People often endorse the moral principle that all human lives are equally valuable. At the same time, people often privilege high-status individuals over low-status individuals. These two inclinations come into conflict in a scenario involving the potential killing of a high-status person to save the lives of multiple low-status people. In the present study, participants viewed a series of sacrificial dilemmas in which the social status of the victims and beneficiaries was varied. We measured participants' choice (sacrifice vs. don't sacrifice), response time, and electroencephalographic activity, with an emphasis on conflict negativity (CN). Overall, we found no effects of victim/beneficiaries status on choice and response time. However, participants displayed a more pronounced CN effect when contemplating a high-status victim/low-status beneficiaries tradeoff than a low-status-victim/high-status beneficiaries tradeoff. Further analyses revealed that this effect was primarily driven by participants who endorsed deontological principles (e.g., "Some rules must never be broken, no matter the consequences"). In contrast, those who endorsed utilitarian principles displayed equivalent levels of conflict negativity, regardless of the social status of victims and beneficiaries. These findings shed light on the role of conflict in the phenomenology of moral decision making.

Maternal intramuscular dexamethasone versus betamethasone before preterm birth (ASTEROID): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Antenatal corticosteroids given to women before preterm birth improve infant survival and health. However, whether dexamethasone or betamethasone have better maternal, neonatal, and childhood health outcomes remains unclear. We therefore aimed to assess whether administration of antenatal dexamethasone to women at risk of preterm birth reduced the risk of death or neurosensory disability in their children at age 2 years compared with betamethasone. We also aimed to assess whether dexamethasone reduced neonatal morbidity, had benefits for the mother, or affected childhood body size, blood pressure, behaviour, or general health compared with betamethasone. METHODS: In this multicentre, double-blind, randomised controlled trial, we recruited pregnant women from 14 maternity hospitals in Australia and New Zealand that could provide care to preterm babies. Women were eligible for study inclusion if they were at risk of preterm birth before 34 weeks of gestation, had a singleton or twin pregnancy, and had no contraindications to antenatal corticosteroids. We randomly assigned women (1:1) to receive two intramuscular injections of either 12 mg dexamethasone (dexamethasone sodium phosphate) or 11·4 mg betamethasone (Celestone Chronodose), 24 h apart. The randomisation schedule used balanced, variable blocks that were stratified by hospital, gestational age, and number of fetuses (singleton or twins). We masked all participants, staff, and assessors to treatment groups. Analyses were by intention to treat. The primary outcome was death or neurosensory disability at age 2 years (corrected for prematurity). This study is registered with ANZCTR, ACTRN12608000631303. FINDINGS: Between Jan 28, 2009, and Feb 1, 2013, we randomly assigned 1346 (78%) women who were pregnant with 1509 fetuses to groups: 679 (50%) women were assigned to receive dexamethasone and 667 (50%) women were assigned to receive betamethasone. 27 (4%) fetuses, infants, or children in the dexamethasone group and 28 (4%) fetuses, infants, or children in the betamethasone group died before age 2 years. The primary outcome of death or neurosensory disability at age 2 years was determined for 603 (79%) of 763 fetuses whose mothers received dexamethasone and 591 (79%) of 746 fetuses whose mothers received betamethasone. We found a similar incidence of death or neurosensory disability in the dexamethasone (198 [33%] of 603 infants) and betamethasone groups (192 [32%] of 591 infants; adjusted relative risk [adjRR] 0·97, 95% CI 0·83 to 1·13; p=0·66). 18 (3%) of 679 women in the dexamethasone group and 28 of 667 (4%) women in the betamethasone group reported side-effects. Discomfort at the injection site, the most frequent side-effect, was less likely in the dexamethasone group than in the betamethasone group (six [1%] women vs 17 [3%] women; p=0·02). INTERPRETATION: The incidence of survival without neurosensory disability at age 2 years did not differ between dexamethasone and betamethasone treatment. Our findings indicate that either antenatal corticosteroid can be given to women before preterm birth to improve infant and child health. FUNDING: National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia).

Prenatal Diet and Child Growth at 18 Months.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to evaluate the effect of an antenatal dietary and lifestyle intervention in pregnant women who are overweight or obese on child outcomes at age 18 months. METHODS: We conducted a follow-up study of children at 18 months of age who were born to women who participated in the Limiting Weight Gain in Overweight and Obese Women during Pregnancy to Improve Health Outcomes randomized trial. The primary follow-up study outcome was prevalence of child BMI z scores >85th percentile. Secondary study outcomes included a range of anthropometric measures, neurodevelopment, general health, and child feeding. Intention to treat principles were used in analyses, according to the treatment group allocated at randomization. RESULTS: A total of 1602 children were assessed at age 18 months (lifestyle advice, n = 816; standard care, n = 786), representing 75.0% of the eligible sample (n = 2136). There were no statistically significant differences in the prevalence of child BMI z scores >85th percentile for children born to women in the lifestyle advice group, compared with the standard care group (lifestyle advice, 505 [47.11%] versus standard care, 483 [45.36%]; adjusted relative risk: 1.04; 95% confidence interval: 0.94 to 1.16; P = .45). There was no evidence of effects on child growth, adiposity, neurodevelopment, or dietary and physical activity patterns. CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence that providing pregnant women who were overweight or obese with an antenatal dietary and lifestyle intervention altered 18-month child growth and adiposity.

Effects of an antenatal dietary intervention in overweight and obese women on 6 month infant outcomes: follow-up from the LIMIT randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: The immediate impact of providing an antenatal dietary intervention during pregnancy has been extensively studied, but little is known of the effects beyond the neonatal period. Our objective was to evaluate the effect of an antenatal dietary intervention in overweight or obese women on infant outcomes 6 months after birth. METHODS: We conducted a follow up study of infants born to women who participated in the LIMIT trial during pregnancy. Live-born infants at 6-months of age, and whose mother provided consent to ongoing follow-up were eligible. The primary follow-up study endpoint was the incidence of infant BMI z-score ≥90th centile for infant sex and age. Secondary study outcomes included a range of infant anthropometric measures, neurodevelopment, general health, and infant feeding. Analyses used intention to treat principles according to the treatment group allocated in pregnancy. Missing data were imputed and analyses adjusted for maternal early pregnancy BMI, parity, study centre, socioeconomic status, age, and smoking status. Outcome assessors were blinded to the allocated treatment group. RESULTS: A total of 1754 infants were assessed at age 6 months (Lifestyle Advice n = 869; Standard Care n = 885), representing 82.1% of the eligible sample (n = 2136). There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of infant BMI z-score ≥90th centile for infants born to women in the Lifestyle Advice group, compared with the Standard Care group (Lifestyle Advice 233 (21.71%) vs. Standard Care 233 (21.90%); adjusted relative risk (aRR) 0.99; 95% confidence interval 0.82 to 1.18; p = 0.88). There were no other effects on infant growth, adiposity, or neurodevelopment. CONCLUSION: Providing pregnant women who were overweight or obese with an antenatal dietary and lifestyle intervention did not alter 6-month infant growth and adiposity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12607000161426).

Vaginal progesterone pessaries for pregnant women with a previous preterm birth to prevent neonatal respiratory distress syndrome (the PROGRESS Study): A multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Neonatal respiratory distress syndrome, as a consequence of preterm birth, is a major cause of early mortality and morbidity. The withdrawal of progesterone, either actual or functional, is thought to be an antecedent to the onset of labour. There remains limited information on clinically relevant health outcomes as to whether vaginal progesterone may be of benefit for pregnant women with a history of a previous preterm birth, who are at high risk of a recurrence. Our primary aim was to assess whether the use of vaginal progesterone pessaries in women with a history of previous spontaneous preterm birth reduced the risk and severity of respiratory distress syndrome in their infants, with secondary aims of examining the effects on other neonatal morbidities and maternal health and assessing the adverse effects of treatment. METHODS: Women with a live singleton or twin pregnancy between 18 to <24 weeks' gestation and a history of prior preterm birth at less than 37 weeks' gestation in the preceding pregnancy, where labour occurred spontaneously or in association with cervical incompetence or following preterm prelabour rupture of the membranes, were eligible. Women were recruited from 39 Australian, New Zealand, and Canadian maternity hospitals and assigned by randomisation to vaginal progesterone pessaries (equivalent to 100 mg vaginal progesterone) (n = 398) or placebo (n = 389). Participants and investigators were masked to the treatment allocation. The primary outcome was respiratory distress syndrome and severity. Secondary outcomes were other respiratory morbidities; other adverse neonatal outcomes; adverse outcomes for the woman, especially related to preterm birth; and side effects of progesterone treatment. Data were analysed for all the 787 women (100%) randomised and their 799 infants. FINDINGS: Most women used their allocated study treatment (740 women, 94.0%), with median use similar for both study groups (51.0 days, interquartile range [IQR] 28.0-69.0, in the progesterone group versus 52.0 days, IQR 27.0-76.0, in the placebo group). The incidence of respiratory distress syndrome was similar in both study groups-10.5% (42/402) in the progesterone group and 10.6% (41/388) in the placebo group (adjusted relative risk [RR] 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64-1.49, p = 0.912)-as was the severity of any neonatal respiratory disease (adjusted treatment effect 1.02, 95% CI 0.69-1.53, p = 0.905). No differences were seen between study groups for other respiratory morbidities and adverse infant outcomes, including serious infant composite outcome (155/406 [38.2%] in the progesterone group and 152/393 [38.7%] in the placebo group, adjusted RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.82-1.17, p = 0.798). The proportion of infants born before 37 weeks' gestation was similar in both study groups (148/406 [36.5%] in the progesterone group and 146/393 [37.2%] in the placebo group, adjusted RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.81-1.17, p = 0.765). A similar proportion of women in both study groups had maternal morbidities, especially those related to preterm birth, or experienced side effects of treatment. In 9.9% (39/394) of the women in the progesterone group and 7.3% (28/382) of the women in the placebo group, treatment was stopped because of side effects (adjusted RR 1.35, 95% CI 0.85-2.15, p = 0.204). The main limitation of the study was that almost 9% of the women did not start the medication or forgot to use it 3 or more times a week. CONCLUSIONS: Our results do not support the use of vaginal progesterone pessaries in women with a history of a previous spontaneous preterm birth to reduce the risk of neonatal respiratory distress syndrome or other neonatal and maternal morbidities related to preterm birth. Individual participant data meta-analysis of the relevant trials may identify specific women for whom vaginal progesterone might be of benefit. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Clinical Trials ISRCTN20269066.

Paternal obesity modifies the effect of an antenatal lifestyle intervention in women who are overweight or obese on newborn anthropometry.

The contribution of paternal obesity to pregnancy outcomes has been little described. Our aims were to determine whether the effect of an antenatal maternal dietary and lifestyle intervention among women who are overweight or obese on newborn adiposity, was modified by paternal obesity. We conducted a secondary analysis of a multicenter randomised trial. Pregnant women with BMI ≥25 kg/m2 received either Lifestyle Advice or Standard Care. Paternal anthropometric measures included height, weight, BMI; waist, hip, calf and mid-upper arm circumferences; biceps and calf skinfold thickness measurements (SFTM); and percentage body fat. Newborn anthropometric outcomes included length; weight; head, arm, abdominal, and chest circumferences; biceps, triceps, subscapular, suprailiac, thigh, and lateral abdominal wall SFTM; and percentage body fat. The effect of an antenatal maternal dietary and lifestyle intervention among women who were overweight or obese on neonatal anthropometric measures, was significantly modified by paternal BMI ≥35.0 kg/m2, with a significantly smaller infant triceps, suprailiac, and thigh SFTM, and percent fat mass, compared with that observed in offspring of lean fathers. Further research is required to determine whether our observed associations are causal, and whether paternal weight loss prior to conception is a potential strategy to reduce the intergenerational effects of obesity.

The effect of an antenatal lifestyle intervention in overweight and obese women on circulating cardiometabolic and inflammatory biomarkers: secondary analyses from the LIMIT randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Maternal overweight and obesity during pregnancy is associated with insulin resistance, hyperglycaemia, hyperlipidaemia and a low-grade state of chronic inflammation. The aim of this pre-specified analysis of secondary outcome measures was to evaluate the effect of providing antenatal dietary and lifestyle advice on cardiometabolic and inflammatory biomarkers. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre trial in which pregnant women who were overweight or obese were randomised to receive either Lifestyle Advice or Standard Care. We report a range of pre-specified secondary maternal and newborn cardiometabolic and inflammatory biomarker outcomes. Maternal whole venous blood was collected at trial entry (mean 14 weeks gestation; non-fasting), at 28 weeks gestation (fasting), and at 36 weeks gestation (non-fasting). Cord blood was collected after birth and prior to the delivery of the placenta. A range of cardiometabolic and inflammatory markers were analysed (total cholesterol, triglycerides, non-esterified fatty acids, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, insulin, glucose, leptin, adiponectin, C-reactive protein, granulocyte macrophage-colony stimulating factor, interferon gamma, TNF-α, and interleukins 1ß, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, and 10). Participants were analysed in the groups to which they were randomised, and were included in the analyses if they had a measure at any time point. RESULTS: One or more biological specimens were available from 1951 women (989 Lifestyle Advice and 962 Standard Care), with cord blood from 1174 infants (596 Lifestyle Advice and 578 Standard Care). There were no statistically significant differences in mean cardiometabolic and inflammatory marker concentrations across pregnancy and in infant cord blood between treatment groups. Estimated treatment group differences were close to zero, with 95% confidence intervals spanning a range of differences that were short of clinical relevance. There was no evidence to suggest that the intervention effect was modified by maternal BMI category. CONCLUSIONS: Despite our findings, it will be worth considering potential relationships between cardiometabolic and inflammatory markers and clinical outcomes, including longer-term infant health and adiposity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ( ACTRN12607000161426 ; Date Registered 09/03/2007).

Effects of Culture and Gender on Judgments of Intent and Responsibility.

Do different cultures hold different views of intentionality? In four studies, participants read scenarios in which the actor's distal intent (a focus on a broader goal) and proximal intent (a focus on the mechanics of the act) were manipulated. In Studies 1-2, when distal intent was more prominent in the actor's mind, North Americans rated the actor more responsible than did Chinese and South Asian participants. When proximal intent was more prominent, Chinese and South Asian participants, if anything, rated the actor more responsible. In Studies 3-4, when distal intent was more prominent, male Americans rated the actor more responsible than did female Americans. When proximal intent was more prominent, females rated the actor more responsible. The authors discuss these findings in relation to the literatures on moral reasoning and cultural psychology.

The effect of antenatal dietary and lifestyle advice for women who are overweight or obese on emotional well-being: the LIMIT randomized trial.

INTRODUCTION: Our aim was to evaluate the effect of dietary and lifestyle advice given to women who were overweight or obese during pregnancy on maternal quality of life, anxiety and risk of depression, and satisfaction with care. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a randomized trial, involving pregnant women with body mass index ≥25 kg/m(2) , recruited from maternity units in South Australia. Women were randomized to Lifestyle Advice or Standard Care, and completed questionnaires assessing risk of depression (Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale), anxiety (Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory), and quality of life (SF-36) at trial entry, 28 and 36 weeks' gestation, and 4 months postpartum. Secondary trial outcomes assessed for this analysis were risk of depression, anxiety, maternal quality of life, and satisfaction with care. RESULTS: One or more questionnaires were completed by 976 of 1108 (90.8%) women receiving Lifestyle Advice and 957 of 1104 (89.7%) women receiving Standard Care. The risk of depression [adjusted risk ratio 1.01; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82-1.24; p = 0.95], anxiety (adjusted risk ratio 1.09; 95% CI 0.93-1.27; p = 0.31), and health-related quality of life were similar between the two groups. Women receiving Lifestyle Advice reported improved healthy food choice [Lifestyle Advice 404 (68.9%) vs. Standard Care 323 (51.8%); p < 0.0001], and exercise knowledge [Lifestyle Advice 444 (75.8%) vs. Standard Care 367 (58.8%); p < 0.0001], and reassurance about their health [Lifestyle Advice 499 (85.3%) vs. Standard Care 485 (77.9%); p = 0.0112], and health of their baby [Lifestyle Advice 527 (90.2%) vs. Standard Care 545 (87.6%); p = 0.0143]. CONCLUSION: Lifestyle advice in pregnancy improved knowledge and provided reassurance without negatively impacting well-being.

The cost-effectiveness of providing antenatal lifestyle advice for women who are overweight or obese: the LIMIT randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Overweight and obesity during pregnancy is common, although robust evidence about the economic implications of providing an antenatal dietary and lifestyle intervention for women who are overweight or obese is lacking. We conducted a health economic evaluation in parallel with the LIMIT randomised trial. Women with a singleton pregnancy, between 10(+0)-20(+0) weeks, and BMI ≥25 kg/m(2) were randomised to Lifestyle Advice (a comprehensive antenatal dietary and lifestyle intervention) or Standard Care. The economic evaluation took the perspective of the health care system and its patients, and compared costs encountered from the additional use of resources from time of randomisation until six weeks postpartum. Increments in health outcomes for both the woman and infant were considered in the cost-effectiveness analysis. Mean costs and effects in the treatment groups allocated at randomisation were compared, and incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and confidence intervals (95%) calculated. Bootstrapping was used to confirm the estimated confidence intervals, and to generate acceptability curves representing the probability of the intervention being cost-effective at alternative monetary equivalent values for the outcomes avoiding high infant birth weight, and respiratory distress syndrome. Analyses utilised intention to treat principles. RESULTS: Overall, the increase in mean costs associated with providing the intervention was offset by savings associated with improved immediate neonatal outcomes, rendering the intervention cost neutral (Lifestyle Advice Group $11261.19±$14573.97 versus Standard Care Group $11306.70±$14562.02; p=0.094). Using a monetary value of $20,000 as a threshold value for avoiding an additional infant with birth weight above 4 kg, the probability that the antenatal intervention is cost-effective is 0.85, which increases to 0.95 when the threshold monetary value increases to $45,000. CONCLUSIONS: Providing an antenatal dietary and lifestyle intervention for pregnant women who are overweight or obese is not associated with increased costs or cost savings, but is associated with a high probability of cost effectiveness. Ongoing participant follow-up into childhood is required to determine the medium to long-term impact of the observed, short-term endpoints, to more accurately estimate the value of the intervention on risk of obesity, and associated costs and health outcomes. TRIALS REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12607000161426).

Construal level and free will beliefs shape perceptions of actors' proximal and distal intent.

Two components of lay observers' calculus of moral judgment are proximal intent (the actor's mind is focused on performing the action) and distal intent (the actor's mind is focused on the broader goal). What causes observers to prioritize one form of intent over the other? The authors observed whether construal level (Studies 1-2) and beliefs about free will (Studies 3-4) would influence participants' sensitivity to the actor's proximal vs. distal intent. In four studies, participants read scenarios in which the actor's proximal and distal intent were independently manipulated. In Study 1, when only distal intent was present in the actor's mind, participants rated the psychologically distant actor more responsible than the psychologically near actor. In Study 2, when only distal intent was in the actor's mind, participants with a chronic high level of action identification rated the actor more responsible than did those with a low level of action identification. In both studies, when only proximal intent was in the actor's mind, construal level did not predict judgments of responsibility. In Study 3, when only proximal intent was present in the actor's mind, the more participants believed in free will, the more they rated the actor responsible. When only distal intent was in the actor's mind, free will belief did not influence ratings of responsibility. In Study 4, the same pattern emerged when free will/determinism beliefs were manipulated and the actor performed a positive (life-saving) act. The authors discuss how these results shed new light on the literatures on moral reasoning and psycho-legal theory.

The effects of antenatal dietary and lifestyle advice for women who are overweight or obese on maternal diet and physical activity: the LIMIT randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Overweight and obesity is a significant health concern during pregnancy. Our aim was to investigate the effect of providing antenatal dietary and lifestyle advice to women who are overweight or obese on components of maternal diet and physical activity. METHODS: We conducted a randomised controlled trial, in which pregnant women with a body mass index≥25 kg/m2, and singleton gestation between 10(+0) to 20(+0) weeks were recruited and randomised to Lifestyle Advice (involving a comprehensive dietary and lifestyle intervention over their pregnancy) or Standard Care. Within the intervention group, we conducted a nested randomised trial in which a subgroup of women were further randomised to receive access to supervised group walking sessions in addition to the standard information presented during the intervention contacts (the Walking group) or standard information only. The outcome measures were maternal dietary intake, (including food groups, macronutrient and micronutrient intake, diet quality (using the Healthy Eating Index; HEI), dietary glycaemic load, and glycaemic index) and maternal physical activity. Women completed the Harvard Semi-Structured Food Frequency Questionnaire, and the Short Questionnaire to Assess Health-enhancing Physical Activity (SQUASH), at trial entry, 28 and 36 weeks' gestational age, and 4 months postpartum. Analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis, using linear mixed effects models with adjustment for the stratification variables. RESULTS: Women randomised to Lifestyle Advice demonstrated a statistically significant increase in the number of servings of fruit and vegetables consumed per day, as well as increased consumption of fibre, and reduced percentage energy intake from saturated fats (P<0.05 for all). Maternal HEI was significantly improved at both 28 (73.35±6.62 versus 71.86±7.01; adjusted difference in means 1.58; 95% CI 0.89 to 2.27; P<0.0001) and 36 (72.95±6.82 versus 71.17±7.69; adjusted difference in means 1.77; 95% CI 1.01 to 2.53; P<0.0001) weeks. There were no differences in dietary glycaemic index or glycaemic load. Women randomised to Lifestyle Advice also demonstrated greater total physical activity (adjusted difference in means 359.76 metabolic equivalent task units (MET) minutes/week; 95% CI 74.87 to 644.65; P=0.01) compared with women receiving Standard Care. The supervised walking group was poorly utilised. CONCLUSIONS: For women who are overweight or obese, antenatal lifestyle advice improves maternal diet and physical activity during pregnancy. Please see related articles: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/12/163 and http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/12/201. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ( ACTRN12607000161426).

The effects of antenatal dietary and lifestyle advice for women who are overweight or obese on neonatal health outcomes: the LIMIT randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Overweight and obesity during pregnancy represents a considerable health burden. While research has focused on interventions to limit gestational weight gain, there is little information describing their impact on neonatal health. Our aim was to investigate the effect on a range of pre-specified secondary neonatal outcomes of providing antenatal dietary and lifestyle advice to women who are overweight or obese. METHODS: We report a range of pre-specified secondary neonatal outcomes from a large randomised trial in which antenatal dietary and lifestyle advice was provided to women who were overweight or obese. Pregnant women were eligible for participation with a body mass index of 25 kg/m(2) or over, and singleton gestation between 10(+0) and 20(+0) weeks. Outcome measures included gestational age at birth; Apgar score below 7 at 5 minutes of age; need for resuscitation at birth; birth weight above 4.5 kg or below 2.5 kg; birth weight, length and head circumference (and Z-scores); admission to the nursery; respiratory distress syndrome; and postnatal length of stay. Data relating to the primary outcome (large for gestational age infants defined as birth weight above the 90th centile) and birth weight above 4 kg have been reported previously. Analyses used intention-to-treat principles. RESULTS: In total, 2,142 infants were included in the analyses. Infants born to women following lifestyle advice were significantly less likely to have birth weight above 4.5 kg (2.15% versus 3.69%; adjusted risk ratio (aRR)=0.59; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 0.98; P=0.04), or respiratory distress syndrome (1.22% versus 2.57%; aRR=0.47; 95% CI 0.24 to 0.90; P=0.02), particularly moderate or severe disease, and had a shorter length of postnatal hospital stay (3.94±7.26 days versus 4.41±9.87 days; adjusted ratio of means 0.89; 95% CI 0.82 to 0.97; P=0.006) compared with infants born to women who received Standard Care. CONCLUSIONS: For women who are overweight or obese, antenatal dietary and lifestyle advice has health benefits for infants, without an increase in the risk of harm. Continued follow-up into childhood will be important to assess the longer-term effects of a reduction in high infant birth weight on risk of child obesity. Please see related articles: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/12/161 and http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/12/201 . CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ( ACTRN12607000161426 ).

Antenatal lifestyle advice for women who are overweight or obese: LIMIT randomised trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of antenatal dietary and lifestyle interventions on health outcomes in overweight and obese pregnant women. DESIGN: Multicentre randomised trial. We utilised a central telephone randomisation server, with computer generated schedule, balanced variable blocks, and stratification for parity, body mass index (BMI) category, and hospital. SETTING: Three public maternity hospitals across South Australia. PARTICIPANTS: 2212 women with a singleton pregnancy, between 10+0 and 20+0 weeks' gestation, and BMI ≥ 25. INTERVENTIONS: 1108 women were randomised to a comprehensive dietary and lifestyle intervention delivered by research staff; 1104 were randomised to standard care and received pregnancy care according to local guidelines, which did not include such information. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Incidence of infants born large for gestational age (birth weight ≥ 90th centile for gestation and sex). Prespecified secondary outcomes included birth weight >4000 g, hypertension, pre-eclampsia, and gestational diabetes. Analyses used intention to treat principles. RESULTS: 2152 women and 2142 liveborn infants were included in the analyses. The risk of the infant being large for gestational age was not significantly different in the two groups (lifestyle advice 203/1075 (19%) v standard care 224/1067 (21%); adjusted relative risk 0.90, 95% confidence interval 0.77 to 1.07; P=0.24). Infants born to women after lifestyle advice were significantly less likely to have birth weight above 4000 g (lifestyle advice 164/1075 (15%) v standard care 201/1067 (19%); 0.82, 0.68 to 0.99; number needed to treat (NNT) 28, 15 to 263; P=0.04). There were no differences in maternal pregnancy and birth outcomes between the two treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: For women who were overweight or obese, the antenatal lifestyle advice used in this study did not reduce the risk delivering a baby weighing above the 90th centile for gestational age and sex or improve maternal pregnancy and birth outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12607000161426).

Australasian randomised trial to evaluate the role of maternal intramuscular dexamethasone versus betamethasone prior to preterm birth to increase survival free of childhood neurosensory disability (A*STEROID): study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Both dexamethasone and betamethasone, given to women at risk of preterm birth, substantially improve short-term neonatal health, increase the chance of the baby being discharged home alive, and reduce childhood neurosensory disability, remaining safe into adulthood. However, it is unclear which corticosteroid is of greater benefit to mother and child.This study aims to determine whether giving dexamethasone to women at risk of preterm birth at less than 34 weeks' gestation increases the chance of their children surviving free of neurosensory disability at two years' corrected age, compared with betamethasone. METHODS/DESIGN: Design randomised, multicentre, placebo controlled trial.Inclusion criteria women at risk of preterm birth at less than 34 weeks' gestation with a singleton or twin pregnancy and no contraindications to the use of antenatal corticosteroids and who give informed consent.Trial entry & randomisation at telephone randomisation eligible women will be randomly allocated to either the dexamethasone group or the betamethasone group, allocated a study number and corresponding treatment pack.Study groups women in the dexamethasone group will be administered two syringes of 12 mg dexamethasone (dexamethasone sodium phosphate) and women in the betamethasone group will be administered two syringes of 11.4 mg betamethasone (Celestone Chronodose). Both study groups consist of intramuscular treatments 24 hours apart.Primary study outcome death or any neurosensory disability measured in children at two years' corrected age.Sample size a sample size of 1449 children is required to detect either a decrease in death or any neurosensory disability from 27.0% to 20.1% with dexamethasone compared with betamethasone, or an increase from 27.0% to 34.5% (two-sided alpha 0.05, 80% power, 5% loss to follow up, design effect 1.2). DISCUSSION: This study will provide high-level evidence of direct relevance for clinical practice. If one drug clearly results in significantly fewer deaths and fewer disabled children then it should be used consistently in women at risk of preterm birth and would be of great importance to women at risk of preterm birth, their children, health services and communities. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12608000631303.

The IDEAL study: investigation of dietary advice and lifestyle for women with borderline gestational diabetes: a randomised controlled trial - study protocol.

BACKGROUND: The Australian Carbohydrate Intolerance Study in Pregnant Women (ACHOIS) showed that treatment of pregnant women with mild gestational diabetes mellitus is beneficial for both women and their infants. It is still uncertain whether there are benefits of similar treatment for women with borderline gestational diabetes.This trial aims to assess whether dietary and lifestyle advice and treatment given to pregnant women who screen for borderline gestational diabetes reduces neonatal complications and maternal morbidities. DESIGN: Multicentre, randomised controlled trial. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Women between 240 and 346 weeks gestation with a singleton pregnancy, a positive oral glucose challenge test (venous plasma glucose ≥7.8 mmol/L) and a normal oral 75 gram glucose tolerance test (fasting venous plasma glucose <5.5 mmol/L and a 2 hour glucose <7.8 mmol/L) with written, informed consent.Trial entry and randomisation: Women with an abnormal oral glucose tolerance test (fasting venous plasma glucose ≥5.5 mmol/L or 2 hour glucose ≥7.8 mmol/L) will not be eligible and will be offered treatment for gestational diabetes, consistent with recommendations based on results of the ACHOIS trial. Eligible women will be randomised into either the 'Routine Care Group' or the 'Intervention Group'.Study groups: Women in the 'Routine Care Group' will receive routine obstetric care reflecting current clinical practice in Australian hospitals. Women in the 'Intervention Group' will receive obstetric care, which will include dietary and lifestyle advice, monitoring of blood glucose and further medical treatment for hyperglycaemia as appropriate.Primary study outcome: Incidence of large for gestational age infants. SAMPLE SIZE: A sample size of 682 women will be sufficient to show a 50% reduction in the risk of large for gestational age infants (alpha 0.05 two-tailed, 80% power, 4% loss to follow up) from 14% to 7% with dietary and lifestyle advice and treatment. DISCUSSION: A conclusive trial outcome will provide reliable evidence of relevance for the care of women with borderline glucose intolerance in pregnancy and their infants. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry - ACTRN12607000174482.

Reduced corticomotor excitability and motor skills development in children born preterm.

The mechanisms underlying the altered neurodevelopment commonly experienced by children born preterm, but without brain lesions, remain unknown. While individuals born the earliest are at most risk, late preterm children also experience significant motor, cognitive and behavioural dysfunction from school age, and reduced income and educational attainment in adulthood. We used transcranial magnetic stimulation and functional assessments to examine corticomotor development in 151 children without cerebral palsy, aged 10-13 years and born after gestations of 25-41 completed weeks. We hypothesized that motor cortex and corticospinal development are altered in preterm children, which underpins at least some of their motor dysfunction. We report for the first time that every week of reduced gestation is associated with a reduction in corticomotor excitability that remains evident in late childhood. This reduced excitability was associated with poorer motor skill development, particularly manual dexterity. However, child adiposity, sex and socio-economic factors regarding the child's home environment soon after birth were also powerful influences on development of motor skills. Preterm birth was also associated with reduced left hemisphere lateralization, but without increasing the likelihood of being left handed per se. These corticomotor findings have implications for normal motor development, but also raise questions regarding possible longer term consequences of preterm birth on motor function.

Placental restriction reduces insulin sensitivity and expression of insulin signaling and glucose transporter genes in skeletal muscle, but not liver, in young sheep.

Poor growth before birth is associated with impaired insulin sensitivity later in life, increasing the risk of type 2 diabetes. The tissue sites at which insulin resistance first develops after intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR), and its molecular basis, are unclear. We have therefore characterized the effects of placental restriction (PR), a major cause of IUGR, on whole-body insulin sensitivity and expression of molecular determinants of insulin signaling and glucose uptake in skeletal muscle and liver of young lambs. Whole-body insulin sensitivity was measured at 30 d by hyperinsulinaemic euglycaemic clamp and expression of insulin signaling genes (receptors, pathways, and targets) at 43 d in muscle and liver of control (n = 15) and PR (n = 13) lambs. PR reduced size at birth and increased postnatal growth, fasting plasma glucose (+15%, P = 0.004), and insulin (+115%, P = 0.009). PR reduced whole-body insulin sensitivity (-43%, P < 0.001) and skeletal muscle expression of INSR (-36%), IRS1 (-28%), AKT2 (-44%), GLUT4 (-88%), GSK3α (-35%), and GYS1 (-31%) overall (each P < 0.05) and decreased AMPKγ3 expression in females (P = 0.030). PR did not alter hepatic expression of insulin signaling and related genes but increased GLUT2 expression (P = 0.047) in males. Whole-body insulin sensitivity correlated positively with skeletal muscle expression of IRS1, AKT2, HK, AMPKγ2, and AMPKγ3 in PR lambs only (each P < 0.05) but not with hepatic gene expression in control or PR lambs. Onset of insulin resistance after PR and IUGR is accompanied by, and can be accounted for by, reduced expression of insulin signaling and metabolic genes in skeletal muscle but not liver.