4.6 Article

Birth weight and Systolic blood pressure in adolescence and adulthood:: Meta-regression analysis of sex- and age-specific results from 20 Nordic studies

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
Volume 166, Issue 6, Pages 634-645

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwm042

Keywords

birth weight; blood pressure; cardiovascular diseases; fetal development; growth; meta-analysis; publication bias; regression analysis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The authors investigated the shape, sex- and age-dependency, and possible confounding of the association between birth weight and systolic blood pressure (SBP) in 197,954 adults from 20 Nordic cohorts (birth years 1910-1987), one of which included 166,249 Swedish male conscripts. Random-effects meta-regression analyses were-performed on estimates obtained from age- and sex-stratified analyses within each of the cohorts. There was an inverse association between birth weight and SBP, irrespective of adjustment for concurrent body mass index. The association was linear for males, but for females with a birth weight greater than 4 kg, SBP increased with birth weight (p < 0.01).: The association was stronger in the older age groups (p < 0.05), although this could have been a birth cohort effect. The association was stronger among females than among males (p = 0.005) when birth weight was less than or equal -to 4 kg. The estimated effect of birth weight on SBP at age 50 years was -1.52 mmHg/kg (95% confidence interval: -2.27, -0.77) in men and -2.80 mmHg/kg (95% confidence interval: -3.85, -1.76) in women. Exclusion of the Swedish conscripts produced nearly identical results. This meta-analysis supports the evidence of an inverse birth weight-SBP association, regardless of adjustment for concurrent body size. It also reveals important heterogeneity in the shape and strength of the association by sex and age.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available