Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-hgkh8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-27T02:30:22.134Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Diet quality before or during pregnancy and the relationship with pregnancy and birth outcomes: the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’s Health

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 May 2016

Ellie Gresham*
Affiliation:
Research Centre for Gender, Health and Ageing, School of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Hunter Medical Research Institute Level 4, University Drive, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia Hunter Medical Research Institute, Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Clare E Collins
Affiliation:
School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medicine and Priority Research Centre in Physical Activity and Nutrition, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia
Gita D Mishra
Affiliation:
School of Public Health, Faculty Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Centre for Longitudinal and Life Course Research, The University of Queensland, Herston, QLD, Australia
Julie E Byles
Affiliation:
Research Centre for Gender, Health and Ageing, School of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Hunter Medical Research Institute Level 4, University Drive, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia Hunter Medical Research Institute, Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Alexis J Hure
Affiliation:
Research Centre for Gender, Health and Ageing, School of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, Hunter Medical Research Institute Level 4, University Drive, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia Hunter Medical Research Institute, Newcastle, NSW, Australia
*
*Corresponding author: Email ellie.gresham@uon.edu.au
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective

To assess whether diet quality before or during pregnancy predicts adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes in a sample of Australian women.

Design

The Dietary Questionnaire for Epidemiological Studies was used to calculate diet quality using the Australian Recommended Food Score (ARFS) methodology modified for pregnancy.

Setting

A population-based cohort participating in the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’s Health (ALSWH).

Subjects

A national sample of Australian women, aged 20–25 and 31–36 years, who were classified as preconception or pregnant when completing Survey 3 or Survey 5 of the ALSWH, respectively. The 1907 women with biologically plausible energy intake estimates were included in regression analyses of associations between preconception and pregnancy ARFS and subsequent pregnancy outcomes.

Results

Preconception and pregnancy groups were combined as no significant differences were detected for total and component ARFS. Women with gestational hypertension, compared with those without, had lower scores for total ARFS, vegetable, fruit, grain and nuts/bean/soya components. Women with gestational diabetes had a higher score for the vegetable component only, and women who had a low-birth-weight infant had lower scores for total ARFS and the grain component, compared with those who did not report these outcomes. Women with the highest ARFS had the lowest odds of developing gestational hypertension (OR=0·4; 95 % CI 0·2, 0·7) or delivering a child of low birth weight (OR=0·4; 95 % CI 0·2, 0·9), which remained significant for gestational hypertension after adjustment for potential confounders.

Conclusions

A high-quality diet before and during pregnancy may reduce the risk of gestational hypertension for the mother.

Type
Research Papers
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2016 

Nutrition before conception and during pregnancy is important for both the mother and growing fetus. Inadequate nutrition, particularly during the first trimester of pregnancy, restricts fetal growth( Reference Antal, Regoly-Merei and Varsanyi 1 Reference Northstone, Emmett and Rogers 3 ) and has long-term consequences for the mother and child( Reference Derbyshire, Davies and Costarelli 2 Reference Moore, Davies and Willson 5 ). Gestational hypertension and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) are the most common complications of pregnancy( Reference Sibai 6 , Reference Zhang, Liu and Solomon 7 ). These complications have been associated with an increased risk of adverse maternal and fetal outcomes( Reference Brown, Hague and Higgins 8 Reference Roberts, Pearson and Cutler 11 ), including stroke, fetal growth restriction, premature birth and death( Reference Brown, Hague and Higgins 8 , Reference Roberts, Pearson and Cutler 11 Reference Peters and Flack 14 ) for gestational hypertension; and development of type 2 diabetes, pre-eclampsia and fetal macrosomia( 15 ) for women with GDM. The leading causes of neonatal death among children born without congenital abnormalities are premature birth and low birth weight, with the majority of deaths occurring in developing countries( Reference Bhutta, Darmstadt and Hasan 16 ). Premature birth and low birth weight impose immediate and lifelong consequences in terms of physical and cognitive development, quality of life and health-care costs( 17 Reference Abu-Saad and Fraser 24 ).

Maternal diet is one potential mediator of gestational hypertension( Reference Brantsæter, Haugen and Samuelsen 25 Reference Thangaratinam, Rogozińska and Jolly 29 ), GDM( Reference Zhang, Liu and Solomon 7 , Reference King 26 , Reference Thangaratinam, Rogozińska and Jolly 29 , Reference Qiu, Zhang and Gelaye 30 ), premature birth( Reference Thangaratinam, Rogozińska and Jolly 29 Reference Ota, Tobe-Gai and Mori 34 ) and low birth weight( Reference Gresham, Byles and Bisquera 35 , Reference Rees, Doyle and Srivastava 36 ). Worldwide, there are few studies( Reference Rifas-Shiman, Rich-Edwards and Kleinman 37 , Reference Xiao, Simas and Person 38 ) on maternal diet quality and the relationship with, or prevention of, adverse pregnancy outcomes. To our knowledge there are none in Australia. Morrison et al. examined diet quality postpartum in a national sample of women with a previous history of GDM( Reference Morrison, Koh and Lowe 39 ) and found that there was an association between poor diet quality postpartum and a history of GDM.

Diet quality refers to the nutritional adequacy and food variety of an individual’s dietary intake and its alignment with national dietary guidelines( Reference Ruel 40 , Reference Kant 41 ). Diet quality offers a broader view of food and nutrient intakes, as opposed to the study of single nutrients or foods. Scores or indices summarise dietary intake assessed by a variety of measures, such as FFQ( Reference Collins, Burrows and Rollo 42 ), into a single numerical value( Reference Burrows, Collins and Watson 43 ). The Australian Recommended Food Score (ARFS) is a previously validated tool that evaluates overall diet quality of adults( Reference Collins, Burrows and Rollo 42 ). The ARFS has been adapted for use in pregnancy previously as a way to measure overall diet quality in this population( Reference Hure, Young and Smith 44 ). The objective of the present study was to determine in a national sample of young Australian women whether diet quality before or during pregnancy predicts adverse perinatal outcomes including gestational hypertension, GDM, premature birth and low birth weight.

Methods

Data collection

The current study used self-reported data collected prospectively from the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’s Health (ALSWH). The ALSWH recruited approximately 40 000 women in 1996 across three cohorts: those born in 1973–78 (18–23 years), 1946–51 (45–50 years) and 1921–26 (70–75 years). Women were randomly selected from Australia’s nationalised health-care system, Medicare, with intentional oversampling in rural and remote areas. Ethical approval was granted by the Human Research Ethics Committees of the Universities of Newcastle (H-076-0795) and Queensland (2004000224), with written informed consent provided by participants. Further details of the ALSWH recruitment and cohort profile have been published elsewhere( Reference Brown, Bryson and Byles 45 Reference Brown, Bryson and Byles 47 ).

The present paper examines data from the 1973–78 cohort, who were broadly representative of Australian women the same age at the baseline survey( Reference Brown, Bryson and Byles 45 ). Paper-based surveys were mailed to participants in 1996 (Survey 1, 14 247 respondents), 2000 (Survey 2, n 9688), 2003 (Survey 3, n 9081) and 2006 (Survey 4, n 9145). In 2009 (Survey 5, n 8200) and 2012 (Survey 6, n 8009) participants could opt to complete the survey online or in hard copy. The current analysis includes all women with dietary data collected at either Survey 3 or 5 (with only one set of data contributing to the analysis), with pregnancy and birth outcome data collected at Survey 5 and 6. The ALSWH survey also included specific demographic and health behavioural measures including area of residence, marital status, level of education, self-reported health, parity, smoking, alcohol, frequency and intensity of physical activity, height and income.

Dietary assessment

FFQ

The Dietary Questionnaire for Epidemiological Studies (DQES) version 2, a seventy-four-item FFQ, was included in Surveys 3 and 5. This FFQ reports usual food and beverage intake for the previous 12 months (excluding vitamin and/or mineral supplementation) and has been validated against 7 d weighed food records in a cohort of young Australian women( Reference Hodge, Patterson and Brown 48 ).

Australian Recommended Food Score

The ARFS uses the DQES to summarise diet quality. Hure et al. have previously summarised the ARFS in the 1973–78 ALSWH cohort by pregnancy status and have shown more favourable nutrient intakes with increasing ARFS (i.e. better diet quality)( Reference Hure, Young and Smith 44 ). The development of the ARFS by Collins et al. has been described in detail elsewhere( Reference Collins, Young and Hodge 49 , Reference Collins, Hodge and Young 50 ). Briefly, the ARFS was modelled on the Recommended Food Score established by Kant and Thompson( Reference Kant and Thompson 51 ) in 1997. The calculation of the ARFS was based on the regular consumption of food items within the DQES whose intake is consistent with national recommendations in the Dietary Guidelines for Australian Adults( 52 ) and the core foods within the Australian Guide to Healthy Eating( Reference Smith, Kellett and Schmerlaib 53 ).

Each recommended food and beverage item that was reportedly consumed on average at least weekly scored 1 point. An additional point was allocated for specific types and amounts of core foods consumed based on the following: at least two servings of fruit daily; at least four servings of vegetables daily; weekly consumption of one to four servings each of beef, veal, lamb, pork, chicken and fresh or canned fish; using reduced-fat or skimmed milk; using soya milk; consuming at least 500 ml milk daily; using high-fibre, wholemeal, rye or multigrain bread; having at least four slices of bread daily; using polyunsaturated or monounsaturated spreads or no spread at all; consuming ricotta or cottage cheese; using low-fat cheese; consuming ice cream less than once weekly; consuming cheese less than once weekly; and consuming yoghurt at least once weekly. For the present analysis 1 point was allocated for having up to five eggs weekly, which is in line with the current recommendations by the National Heart Foundation( 54 , 55 ). There is no safe level of alcohol consumption during pregnancy( 56 ). Questions pertaining to alcohol consumption were removed from the present analysis, as we were unable to determine if women who were pregnant were reporting their pre-pregnancy intakes. Subsequently, the maximum ARFS that could be achieved was 72.

Sample

Women were aged 20–25 years at Survey 3 and 31–36 years at Survey 5, which both included the FFQ. Pregnancy status was classified as either preconception or pregnant. The woman’s survey return date and child’s date of birth were used to classify pregnancy status. Preconception included women who returned a survey 10–15 months before a child’s date of birth. Women were classified as pregnant if they returned a survey 0–9 months before a child’s date of birth. Each participant contributed only their first available preconception/pregnancy data.

Participants were excluded from the present analysis if: (i) they were not classified as preconception or pregnant when completing the FFQ (Survey 3, n 8055; Survey 5, n 6912); (ii) they had a multiple birth (Survey 3, n 17; Survey 5, n 41); or (iii) they did not complete the FFQ (Survey 3, n 5; Survey 5, n 0). A further 101 women had preconception and/or pregnancy data at both Surveys 3 and 5, so their Survey 5 data were excluded. Energy cut-off values recommended by Meltzer et al. were applied to the preconception and pregnancy groups, excluding those who reported daily energy intakes below 4·5 MJ/d or above 20·0 MJ/d( Reference Meltzer, Brantsæter and Ydersbond 57 ). Energy values outside this range were considered biologically implausible and indicative of misreporting (Survey 3, n 95; Survey 5, n 148). Energy from alcohol was not included in the reported total daily energy intakes.

Pregnancy and birth outcomes

Gestational hypertension, GDM, premature birth and low birth weight were the outcomes included in the present analysis. From Survey 4 onwards, women were asked ‘Did you experience any of the following?’ with ‘A low birth weight infant (weighing less than 2500 grams or $5{\raise0.7ex 1\over 2}$ pounds)’ and ‘Premature birth’ (no gestational cut-off specified) listed. From Survey 5 onwards, women were asked to recall for each child whether they had been diagnosed by a doctor or treated for ‘Hypertension (high blood pressure) during pregnancy’ or ‘Gestational diabetes’. For example, women reporting dietary data at Survey 5 had their pregnancy and birth outcomes taken from the next available survey (Survey 6). We have previously assessed the reliability of these self-reported reproductive outcomes against more objective medical records, showing very high agreement (≥92 %) between the two data sets( Reference Gresham, Forder and Chojenta 58 ).

Statistical analyses

The characteristics of women included in the study were compared with those who were not included. Means and standard deviations are presented for normally distributed continuous variables and proportions are presented for categorical variables. Frequencies of the pregnancy and birth outcomes, as well as the ARFS food component scores and total ARFS, were compared between preconception and pregnant women. Univariate analysis (t test) was performed to compare component scores and total ARFS for different reproductive outcomes, with its effect adjusted for all potential confounders (multivariable analysis), including body weight, smoking, education, parity, area of residence, exercise status and maternal age. ARFS results were ranked and divided into quintiles. The association between quintiles of the ARFS and pregnancy and birth outcomes as dichotomous variables was examined by multiple logistic regressions. Risks are presented as crude and adjusted odds ratios with 95 % confidence intervals. P values ≤0·05 were considered statistically significant. Analyses were performed using the statistical software package Stata IC, version 13.

Results

The selection of cohort participants eligible for inclusion in the present analysis is presented in Fig. 1. A total of 1907 women with plausible dietary data were included in the analysis. Table 1 summarises the baseline characteristics (reported in 1996) of women included in the analysis and for those in the remaining 1973–78 ALSWH cohort. Women included were the same age as those excluded (20·8 and 20·7 years, respectively), with the majority from both groups living in urban areas (56·2 % v. 55·1 %). At baseline, women included were more likely to be single, to have no children, and be less likely to smoke or drink alcohol at risky levels. While there was a similar number of women who attained school or high-school education, more women included in the current analysis reported university education (16·3 % v. 10·3 %).

Fig. 1 Attrition for women from the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’s Health 1973–78 cohort. †Preconception: women who returned a survey with a completed FFQ, 10–15 months before pregnancy. ‡Pregnant: women who returned a survey with a completed FFQ and reported that they were pregnant or were 0–9 months before pregnancy

Table 1 Baseline characteristics for the young cohort of the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’s Health 1973–78 according to inclusion (n 1907) or not in the present study (n 12 340)

Participant characteristics were taken from the baseline survey.

For the pregnancy and birth outcomes, 8 % (n 144) self-reported gestational hypertension; 4 % (n 83) reported GDM; 6 % (n 122) reported a premature birth; and 3 % (n 62) reported a low-birth-weight infant.

Comparisons of the total and component scores that make up the ARFS for women classified as preconception or pregnant indicated very few differences (not tested for significance; Table 2). Women who were pregnant scored half a point more for the fruit component, which mostly accounted for the difference in total ARFS by group (31·5 preconception v. 32·1 pregnant). Because there was no real difference in ARFS total or component scores the preconception and pregnancy groups were combined for the remaining analyses.

Table 2 Mean component scores and total Australian Recommended Food Score (ARFS) for women according to pregnancy status and energy intake in the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’s Health 1973–78 cohort

Max, maximum; min, minimum.

Preconception and pregnancy groups combined.

Sub-components of the protein food category.

The univariate analyses between the ARFS and reproductive outcomes are reported in Table 3. Multivariate analysis was also applied to adjust for potential confounding from weight, smoking, education, parity, area of residence, exercise status and maternal age. Overall, women with gestational hypertension, compared with those without, had lower scores for the total ARFS and the vegetable, fruit, grain and nuts/bean/soya components, which all remained significant after adjustment. Women with GDM had a higher score for the vegetable component only, compared with women without GDM, which remained significant after adjustment. Women who had a low-birth-weight infant had a lower total ARFS, from lower vegetable and grain component scores, compared with those who did report low birth weight. The results for low birth weight remained significant after adjustment except that the vegetable component was of borderline significance (P=0·06). There were no significant associations between ARFS component and total scores and premature birth.

Table 3 Component scores and total Australian Recommended Food Score (ARFS) according to pregnancy and birth outcomes for womenFootnote in the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’s Health 1973–78 cohort

Max, maximum.

*P value is statistically significant at ≤0·05.

**P value is statistically significant at ≤0·01.

Preconception and pregnancy groups combined.

The results of multiple logistic regression testing crude and adjusted associations between quintiles of ARFS and pregnancy and birth outcomes are summarised in Table 4. Women in the lowest quintile of diet quality (quintile 1) were used as the reference group. Women in quintile 5 had 60 % lower odds of developing gestational hypertension and delivering a low-birth-weight infant than women in quintile 1, before and after adjustment for potential confounders. A lower risk of gestational hypertension and delivering a low-birth-weight infant was observed in every quintile of ARFS compared with the reference quintile, with the exception of quintile 3 for gestational hypertension. Overall, diet quality by quintile was not associated with GDM or premature birth.

Table 4 Crude and adjusted associations between quintiles of the Australian Recommended Food Score (ARFS) and pregnancy and birth outcomes for women in the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’s Health 1973–78 cohort

Ref., reference category.

*P value is statistically significant at ≤0·05.

**P value is statistically significant at ≤0·01.

Adjusted for level of education, area of residence, smoking status, parity, age, weight and level of exercise.

Discussion

This is the first Australian study and the largest international study investigating the relationship between diet quality before or during pregnancy in a sample of Australian women in association with adverse outcomes gestational hypertension, GDM, premature birth and low birth weight. The current study demonstrates that lower diet quality (before or during pregnancy), based on a previously validated composite diet quality score, the ARFS, is associated with the development of gestational hypertension for the mother and low birth weight for the child. Moreover, women with the highest ARFS had the lowest risk of developing gestational hypertension or delivering a child of low birth weight.

Interpretation

The relationship between diet quality before and during pregnancy as measured by the ARFS and adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes has not been previously analysed in Australia. To our knowledge, Hure et al. and Morrison et al. are the only studies to evaluate diet quality in a national sample of young Australian women by pregnancy status( Reference Hure, Young and Smith 44 ) or with a history of GDM( Reference Morrison, Koh and Lowe 39 ), respectively. Both Hure et al. and Morrison et al. demonstrated that irrespective of pregnancy status( Reference Hure, Young and Smith 44 ) or past history of GDM( Reference Morrison, Koh and Lowe 39 ), young women at this life stage commonly have poor diet quality scores reflecting a failure to meet national dietary recommendations.

In the current study, analysis of the relationship between ARFS components and pregnancy and birth outcomes indicated that no individual ARFS components accounted for more than one whole point difference between women with and without adverse perinatal outcomes. Analysis by total ARFS demonstrated differences in mean scores of two points or more between women with and without gestational hypertension and those women who had a low-birth-weight infant or not. The most poorly scored food groups were protein (especially nuts/bean/soya) and grains, with nuts/bean/soya and grain components shown to be a predictor of gestational hypertension and grains a predictor of low birth weight. To achieve a higher grain score, and higher total ARFS, women would need to consume a greater variety of wholemeal, wholegrain and high-fibre breads and cereals, including rice, pasta and noodles, weekly or more often; while to achieve a higher score for the nuts/bean/soya component and hence higher total ARFS, women would need to include a greater variety of nuts, nut butter, baked beans, tofu, soya and other beans (i.e. lentils) at least once per week.

Worldwide, there are only a few other studies that examine the association between diet quality during pregnancy and pregnancy and birth outcomes( Reference Rifas-Shiman, Rich-Edwards and Kleinman 37 , Reference Carmichael, Shaw and Selvin 59 Reference Rodríguez-Bernal, Rebagliato and Iñiguez 61 ). Similar to results in the current study, Rodríguez-Bernal et al. ( Reference Rodríguez-Bernal, Rebagliato and Iñiguez 61 ) observed a significant increase in newborn birth weight among women with better diet quality during the first trimester compared with infants born to women with the lowest diet quality scores (mean (sd): 3387·9 (399·5) v. 3218·1 (442·3) g). Rifas-Shiman et al. found a significant decrease in the risk of pre-eclampsia for each 5-point increase in diet quality during the second trimester only (OR=0·87; 95 % CI 0·76, 1·00)( Reference Rifas-Shiman, Rich-Edwards and Kleinman 37 ). Despite birth weight and pre-eclampsia not being direct outcomes in the current study, they give further strength to the relationship between diet quality and risk of developing gestational hypertension or delivering a low-birth-weight infant. Like the modified ARFS used in the current study, Rodríguez-Bernal et al. and Rifas-Shiman et al. excluded alcohol and multivitamin use when calculating their modified Alternate Healthy Eating Index scores. Two recent meta-analyses of dietary intervention trials (food, counselling or a combination of both) on pregnancy and birth outcomes have shown significant effects for a reduction in maternal blood pressure, incidence of preterm delivery( Reference Gresham, Bisquera and Byles 62 ), increase in birth weight and lower incidence of low birth weight( Reference Gresham, Byles and Bisquera 35 ), further highlighting the effect of diet during pregnancy and the potential to lower the incidence of adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes.

Implications for practice and research

The findings of the current study suggest that higher diet quality before or during pregnancy is associated with a lower risk of gestational hypertension for the mother and low birth weight for the infant. General practitioners are generally one of the first health professionals a woman consults when she is pregnant or trying to conceive. This initial consultation provides an ideal opportunity to assess a woman’s current dietary intake, identify those with or at risk of low diet quality, and create opportunities for the woman to receive dietary advice targeting improvements in diet quality as a practical strategy to reduce the risk of undesirable pregnancy and birth outcomes. A questionnaire to measure diet quality before or during pregnancy would be a much simpler tool with a lower participant and analytic burden than an FFQ that carries a high burden and costly analysis( Reference Collins, Young and Hodge 49 ). Health professionals, including general practitioners, obstetricians, midwives, dietitians and pharmacists, should encourage those women who are pregnant or considering pregnancy to consume a wide variety of nutritious foods, particularly vegetables, fruits, whole grains, nuts and legumes, dairy and lean animal proteins.

Large, high-quality randomised controlled trials focusing on diet quality before and during pregnancy on reproductive outcomes are also required. Dietary intervention trials should focus on a wide variety of nutrient-dense foods to achieve high diet quality.

Strengths and limitations

In comparison with national data (inclusive of all pregnant women regardless of age)( 63 ), women in the current study had a lower prevalence of GDM (11 % national data v. 4 % self-reported), premature birth (9 % v. 7 %) and low birth weight (6 % v. 4 %), with the same prevalence of gestational hypertension (8 %). The higher proportion of university-educated women in our sub-sample may account for some of this bias. We previously conducted an agreement study, demonstrating high agreement (≥87 %) between self-reported ALSWH and administrative data for the adverse outcomes gestational hypertension, GDM, preterm birth and low birth weight( Reference Gresham, Forder and Chojenta 58 ), offering a high degree of confidence in the accuracy of ALSWH self-report. Women diagnosed with gestational hypertension and/or GDM have been shown to develop complications in the infant such as premature birth or low birth weight. For the current analysis each pregnancy and birth outcome was examined separately. Future studies should include analyses that adjust for gestational hypertension and GDM when examining premature birth and low birth weight.

Like all tools used to measure dietary intake, the ARFS has limitations. Women are asked to report their usual consumption of foods over the preceding 12 months in the FFQ; therefore results may be influenced by the season in which the questionnaire is administered or be more likely to emphasise recently consumed foods. As the ARFS focuses on the frequency and variety of food choices, the scoring is independent of reported amounts of food items that would have reduced the associated measurement error. Under- and over-reporting may have occurred in the FFQ; however, an attempt to address this has been made by limiting analysis to those with plausible dietary intakes. Diet during pregnancy may also vary across trimesters. The present analysis assumes that diet remains constant, and there are some data supporting highly correlated intakes in early and late pregnancy( Reference Blumfield, Hure and MacDonald-Wicks 64 ).

Conclusion

The current study is the largest in Australia and internationally to investigate the association between diet quality during pregnancy and adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes. The current findings suggest that higher diet quality during pregnancy is associated with lower risk of gestational hypertension and favours fetal growth by decreasing the risk of delivering a low-birth-weight infant. The current brief diet quality questionnaire may be an appropriate tool to help health professionals identify women at risk of poor diet quality during pregnancy and provide an opportunity to intervene to lower the risk of adverse outcomes. Those who are pregnant or considering pregnancy should consume a wide variety of nutritious foods, particularly vegetables and fruits of different colours and types; wholemeal, wholegrain and high-fibre grain-based foods; nuts and legumes. High-quality randomised controlled trials that test strategies to improve diet quality and effects on pregnancy and birth outcomes are needed.

Acknowledgements

Acknowledgements: The research on which this paper is based was conducted as part of the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’s Health, the University of Newcastle and the University of Queensland. The authors are grateful to the Australian Government Department of Health for funding and to the women who provided the interview data. The authors thank Professor Graham Giles, of the Cancer Epidemiology Centre of Cancer Council Victoria, for permission to use the Dietary Questionnaire for Epidemiological Studies version 2 (Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, 1996). Financial support: This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors. Conflict of interest: None. Authorship: E.G. helped design the study, undertook the statistical analysis and was responsible for the project’s implementation, including the preparation of the manuscript. C.E.C. helped design the study and provided ongoing input. G.D.M. helped design the study and provided ongoing input. J.E.B. helped design the study and provided ongoing input. A.J.H. designed the study and provided ongoing input into the implementation, quality assurance and control aspects of the project. All authors were involved in revising the manuscript for important intellectual content and have made a significant contribution to the research and development of the manuscript. Ethics of human subject participation: Ethical approval was granted by the Human Research Ethics Committees of the Universities of Newcastle (H-076-0795) and Queensland (2004000224), with written informed consent provided by participants.

References

1. Antal, M, Regoly-Merei, A, Varsanyi, H et al. (1997) Nutritional survey of pregnant women in Hungary. Int J Vitam Nutr Res 67, 115122.Google Scholar
2. Derbyshire, E, Davies, J, Costarelli, V et al. (2006) Prepregnancy body mass index and dietary intake in the first trimester of pregnancy. J Hum Nutr Diet 19, 267273.Google Scholar
3. Northstone, K, Emmett, P & Rogers, I (2008) Dietary patterns in pregnancy and associations with socio-demographic and lifestyle factors. Eur J Clin Nutr 62, 471479.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4. Godfrey, K & Robinson, S (1998) Maternal nutrition, placental growth and fetal programming. Proc Nutr Soc 57, 105111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5. Moore, V, Davies, M, Willson, K et al. (2004) Dietary composition of pregnant women is related to size of the baby at birth. J Nutr 134, 18201826.Google Scholar
6. Sibai, BM (2003) Diagnosis and management of gestational hypertension and preeclampsia. Obstet Gynecol 102, 181192.Google Scholar
7. Zhang, C, Liu, S, Solomon, CG et al. (2006) Dietary fiber intake, dietary glycemic load, and the risk for gestational diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care 29, 22232230.Google Scholar
8. Brown, MA, Hague, WM, Higgins, J et al. (2000) The detection, investigation and management of hypertension in pregnancy: full consensus statement. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 40, 139155.Google Scholar
9. Östlund, I, Hanson, U, Björklund, A et al. (2003) Maternal and fetal outcomes if gestational impaired glucose tolerance is not treated. Diabetes Care 26, 21072111.Google Scholar
10. Roberts, CL, Algert, CS, Morris, JM et al. (2005) Hypertensive disorders in pregnancy: a population-based study. Med J Aust 182, 332335.Google Scholar
11. Roberts, JM, Pearson, G, Cutler, J et al. (2003) Summary of the NHLBI Working Group on Research on Hypertension During Pregnancy. Hypertension 41, 437445.Google Scholar
12. Lowe, SA, Brown, MA, Dekker, GA et al. (2009) Guidelines for the management of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy 2008. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 49, 242246.Google Scholar
13. National High Blood Pressure Education Program Working Group on High Blood Pressure in Pregnancy (2000) Report of the National High Blood Pressure Education Program Working Group on High Blood Pressure in Pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 183, issue 1, S1S22.Google Scholar
14. Peters, RM & Flack, JM (2004) Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs 33, 209220.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15. American Diabetes Association (2003) Gestational diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care 26, Suppl. 1, S103S105.Google Scholar
16. Bhutta, ZA, Darmstadt, GL, Hasan, BS et al. (2005) Community-based interventions for improving perinatal and neonatal health outcomes in developing countries: a review of the evidence. Pediatrics 115, 2 Suppl., 519617.Google Scholar
17. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (2014) Australia’s Health 2014. Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.Google Scholar
18. Blencowe, H, Cousens, S, Oestergaard, MZ et al. (2012) National, regional, and worldwide estimates of preterm birth rates in the year 2010 with time trends since 1990 for selected countries: a systematic analysis and implications. Lancet 379, 21622172.Google Scholar
19. Gilbert, WM, Nesbitt, TS & Danielsen, B (2003) The cost of prematurity: quantification by gestational age and birth weight. Obstet Gynecol 102, 488492.Google Scholar
20. Petrou, S (2003) Economic consequences of preterm birth and low birthweight. BJOG 110, Suppl. 20, 1723.Google Scholar
21. Petrou, S (2005) The economic consequences of preterm birth during the first 10 years of life. BJOG 112, Suppl. 1, 1015.Google Scholar
22. Clements, KM, Barfield, WD, Ayadi, MF et al. (2007) Preterm birth-associated cost of early intervention services: an analysis by gestational age. Pediatrics 119, e866e874.Google Scholar
23. Chaikind, S & Corman, H (1991) The impact of low birthweight on special education costs. J Health Econ 10, 291311.Google Scholar
24. Abu-Saad, K & Fraser, D (2010) Maternal nutrition and birth outcomes. Epidemiol Rev 32, 525.Google Scholar
25. Brantsæter, AL, Haugen, M, Samuelsen, SO et al. (2009) A dietary pattern characterized by high intake of vegetables, fruits, and vegetable oils is associated with reduced risk of preeclampsia in nulliparous pregnant Norwegian women. J Nutr 139, 11621168.Google Scholar
26. King, JC (2006) Maternal obesity, metabolism, and pregnancy outcomes. Annu Rev Nutr 26, 271291.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
27. Oken, E, Ning, Y, Rifas-Shiman, SL et al. (2007) Diet during pregnancy and risk of preeclampsia or gestational hypertension. Ann Epidemiol 17, 663668.Google Scholar
28. Schoenaker, DA, Soedamah-Muthu, SS & Mishra, GD (2014) The association between dietary factors and gestational hypertension and pre-eclampsia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. BMC Med 12, 157.Google Scholar
29. Thangaratinam, S, Rogozińska, E, Jolly, K et al. (2012) Effects of interventions in pregnancy on maternal weight and obstetric outcomes: meta-analysis of randomised evidence. BMJ 344, e2088.Google Scholar
30. Qiu, C, Zhang, C, Gelaye, B et al. (2011) Gestational diabetes mellitus in relation to maternal dietary heme iron and nonheme iron intake. Diabetes Care 34, 15641569.Google Scholar
31. Carmichael, SL, Yang, W & Shaw, GM (2013) Maternal dietary nutrient intake and risk of preterm delivery. Am J Perinatol 30, 579588.Google Scholar
32. Englund-Ögge, L, Brantsæter, AL, Sengpiel, V et al. (2014) Maternal dietary patterns and preterm delivery: results from large prospective cohort study. BMJ 348, g1446.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
33. Bloomfield, FH (2011) How is maternal nutrition related to preterm birth? Annu Rev Nutr 31, 235261.Google Scholar
34. Ota, E, Tobe-Gai, R, Mori, R et al. (2012) Antenatal dietary advice and supplementation to increase energy and protein intake. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 9, CD000032.Google Scholar
35. Gresham, E, Byles, JE, Bisquera, A et al. (2014) Effects of dietary interventions on neonatal and infant outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Clin Nutr 100, 12981321.Google Scholar
36. Rees, GA, Doyle, W, Srivastava, A et al. (2005) The nutrient intakes of mothers of low birth weight babies – a comparison of ethnic groups in East London, UK. Matern Child Nutr 1, 9199.Google Scholar
37. Rifas-Shiman, SL, Rich-Edwards, JW, Kleinman, KP et al. (2009) Dietary quality during pregnancy varies by maternal characteristics in Project Viva: a US cohort. J Am Diet Assoc 109, 10041011.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
38. Xiao, RS, Simas, TAM, Person, SD et al. (2015) Diet quality and history of gestational diabetes mellitus among childbearing women, United States, 2007–2010. Prev Chronic Dis 12, E25.Google Scholar
39. Morrison, MK, Koh, D, Lowe, JM et al. (2012) Postpartum diet quality in Australian women following a gestational diabetes pregnancy. Eur J Clin Nutr 66, 11601165.Google Scholar
40. Ruel, MT (2003) Operationalizing dietary diversity: a review of measurement issues and research priorities. J Nutr 133, 11 Suppl. 2, 3911S3926S.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
41. Kant, AK (1996) Indexes of overall diet quality: a review. J Am Diet Assoc 96, 785791.Google Scholar
42. Collins, C, Burrows, T, Rollo, M et al. (2015) The comparative validity and reproducibility of a diet quality index for adults: the Australian Recommended Food Score. Nutrients 7, 785798.Google Scholar
43. Burrows, TL, Collins, K, Watson, J et al. (2014) Validity of the Australian recommended food score as a diet quality index for pre-schoolers. Nutr J 13, 87.Google Scholar
44. Hure, A, Young, A, Smith, R et al. (2009) Diet and pregnancy status in Australian women. Public Health Nutr 12, 853861.Google Scholar
45. Brown, WJ, Bryson, L, Byles, JE et al. (1999) Women’s Health Australia: recruitment for a national longitudinal cohort study. Women Health 28, 2340.Google Scholar
46. Lee, C, Dobson, AJ, Brown, WJ et al. (2005) Cohort Profile: The Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’s Health. Int J Epidemiol 34, 987991.Google Scholar
47. Brown, W, Bryson, L, Byles, J et al. (1996) Women’s Health Australia: establishment of the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’s Health. J Womens Health 5, 467472.Google Scholar
48. Hodge, A, Patterson, AJ, Brown, WJ et al. (2000) The Anti Cancer Council of Victoria FFQ: relative validity of nutrient intakes compared with weighed food records in young to middle-aged women in a study of iron supplementation. Aust N Z J Public Health 24, 576583.Google Scholar
49. Collins, CE, Young, AF & Hodge, A (2008) Diet quality is associated with higher nutrient intake and self-rated health in mid-aged women. J Am Coll Nutr 27, 146157.Google Scholar
50. Collins, CE, Hodge, A & Young, A (2005) Are you what you eat? Associations between diet quality and health utilisation in mid-age women from the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’s Health (abstract). In: Nutrition and Dietetics. Dietitians Association of Australia 23rd National Conference, Perth, 16–28 May 2005.Google Scholar
51. Kant, AK & Thompson, FE (1997) Measures of overall diet quality from a food frequency questionnaire: National Health Interview Survey, 1992. Nutr Res 17, 14431456.Google Scholar
52. National Health and Medical Research Council (2003) Dietary Guidelines for Australian Adults. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.Google Scholar
53. Smith, A, Kellett, E & Schmerlaib, Y (1998) The Australian Guide to Healthy Eating. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.Google Scholar
54. National Heart Foundation (2009) Heart Foundation Position Statement: Dietary fats and dietary sterols for cardiovascular health. https://heartfoundation.org.au/images/uploads/publications/Dietary-fats-position-statement.pdf (accessed May 2016).Google Scholar
55. National Heart Foundation (2009) Summary of evidence: Dietary fats and dietary cholesterol for cardiovascular health. https://heartfoundation.org.au/images/uploads/publications/Dietary-fats-summary-evidence.pdf (accessed May 2016).Google Scholar
56. National Health and Medical Research Council (2009) Australian Guidelines To Reduce Health Risks from Drinking Alcohol. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.Google Scholar
57. Meltzer, HM, Brantsæter, AL, Ydersbond, TA et al. (2008) Methodological challenges when monitoring the diet of pregnant women in a large study: experiences from the Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study (MoBa). Matern Child Nutr 4, 1427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
58. Gresham, E, Forder, P, Chojenta, C et al. (2015) Agreement between self-reported perinatal outcomes and administrative data in New South Wales, Australia. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 15, 161.Google Scholar
59. Carmichael, SL, Shaw, GM, Selvin, S et al. (2003) Diet quality and risk of neural tube defects. Med Hypotheses 60, 351355.Google Scholar
60. Philipps, C & Johnson, NE (1977) The impact of quality of diet and other factors on birth weight of infants. Am J Clin Nutr 30, 215225.Google Scholar
61. Rodríguez-Bernal, CL, Rebagliato, M, Iñiguez, C et al. (2010) Diet quality in early pregnancy and its effects on fetal growth outcomes: the Infancia y Medio Ambiente (Childhood and Environment) Mother and Child Cohort Study in Spain. Am J Clin Nutr 91, 16591666.Google Scholar
62. Gresham, E, Bisquera, A, Byles, JE et al. (2014) The effects of dietary interventions on pregnancy outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Matern Child Nutr 12, 523.Google Scholar
63. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (2014) Australia’s Mothers and Babies 2012. Perinatal Statistics Series no. 30. Catalogue no. PER 69. Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.Google Scholar
64. Blumfield, ML, Hure, AJ, MacDonald-Wicks, LK et al. (2012) Dietary balance during pregnancy is associated with fetal adiposity and fat distribution. Am J Clin Nutr 96, 10321041.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Fig. 1 Attrition for women from the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’s Health 1973–78 cohort. †Preconception: women who returned a survey with a completed FFQ, 10–15 months before pregnancy. ‡Pregnant: women who returned a survey with a completed FFQ and reported that they were pregnant or were 0–9 months before pregnancy

Figure 1

Table 1 Baseline characteristics for the young cohort of the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’s Health 1973–78 according to inclusion (n 1907) or not in the present study (n 12 340)

Figure 2

Table 2 Mean component scores and total Australian Recommended Food Score (ARFS) for women according to pregnancy status and energy intake in the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’s Health 1973–78 cohort

Figure 3

Table 3 Component scores and total Australian Recommended Food Score (ARFS) according to pregnancy and birth outcomes for women† in the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’s Health 1973–78 cohort

Figure 4

Table 4 Crude and adjusted associations between quintiles of the Australian Recommended Food Score (ARFS) and pregnancy and birth outcomes for women in the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women’s Health 1973–78 cohort