King's College London

Research portal

Dietary patterns in obese pregnant women; Influence of a behavioral intervention of diet and physical activity in the UPBEAT randomized controlled trial

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Angela C. Flynn, Paul T. Seed, Nashita Patel, Suzanne Barr, Ruth Bell, Annette L. Briley, Keith M. Godfrey, Scott M. Nelson, Eugene Oteng-Ntim, Sian M. Robinson, Thomas A. Sanders, Naveed Sattar, Jane Wardle, Lucilla Poston, Louise M. Goff

Original languageEnglish
Article number124
JournalThe international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 29 Nov 2016


King's Authors


Background: Understanding dietary patterns in obese pregnant women will inform future intervention strategies to improve pregnancy outcomes and the health of the child. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of a behavioral intervention of diet and physical activity advice on dietary patterns in obese pregnant woman participating in the UPBEAT study, and to explore associations of dietary patterns with pregnancy outcomes. Methods: In the UPBEAT randomized controlled trial, pregnant obese women from eight UK multi-ethnic, inner-city populations were randomly assigned to receive a diet/physical activity intervention or standard antenatal care. The dietary intervention aimed to reduce glycemic load and saturated fat intake. Diet was assessed using a food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) at baseline (15+0-18+6 weeks' gestation), post intervention (27+0-28+6 weeks) and in late pregnancy (34+0-36+0 weeks). Dietary patterns were characterized using factor analysis of the baseline FFQ data, and changes compared in the control and intervention arms. Patterns were related to pregnancy outcomes in the combined control/intervention cohort (n=1023). Results: Four distinct baseline dietary patterns were defined; Fruit and vegetables, African/Caribbean, Processed, and Snacks, which were differently associated with social and demographic factors. The UPBEAT intervention significantly reduced the Processed (0.14; 95% CI 0.19, 0.08, P

Download statistics

No data available

View graph of relations

© 2018 King's College London | Strand | London WC2R 2LS | England | United Kingdom | Tel +44 (0)20 7836 5454