Table 4

 Occupational activity and risk of being small-for-gestational age at delivery

First author (year)Numbers in analysisRR (95% CI)ExposureHigher potential forIncomplete reporting
ComparisonTimingBiasConfounding
h/d, hours per day; h/wk, hours per week; x/wk, times per week.
RR is used generically to encompass a variety of published effect measures (odds ratios, incidence density ratios, hazard ratios and so on).
Weekly working hours
    Cohort studies
        Pompeii LA (2005)3810371.1 (0.7 to 1.7)>46 vs 35–45 h/wkTrimester 1NoNoNo
        Pompeii LA (2005)3810371.0 (0.6 to 1.8)>46 vs 35–45 h/wkTrimester 2NoNoNo
        Tuntiseranee P (1998)528862.1 (0.6 to 7.0)⩾61 vs ⩽50 h/wk15–28 weeksNoYesNo
    Cross-sectional studies
        Bodin L (1999)816851.1 (0.7 to 1.9)⩾36 vs 21–35 h/wkTrimester 2NoNoNo
        Ceron-Mireles P (1996)1124061.59 (1.14 to 2.22)>50 vs 3–25 h/wkNot statedNoYesNo
        Fortier I (1995)1318330.99 (0.7 to 1.39)⩾40 vs <30 h/wkNot statedNoNoNo
        Klebanoff MA (1990)209890.9 (0.6 to 1.3)Residents (>100 h) vs othersAnyNoNoNo
        Savitz DA (1996)465890.8 (0.6 to 1.2)⩾40 vs no paid work5 monthsNoNoNo
Shift work
    Cohort studies
        Pompeii LA (2005)3817961.3 (0.8 to 2.2)Regular night work (yes vs no)Trimester 1NoNoNo
        Pompeii LA (2005)3817961.4 (0.9 to 2.4)Regular night work (yes vs no)Trimester 2NoNoNo
        Zhu JL (2004)5635 6621.07 (0.94 to 1.21)Rotating shift work vs daytime workTrimesters 1 and 2NoNoNo
    Cross-sectional studies
        Bodin L (1999)816850.8 (0.4 to 1.8)Night vs dayTrimester 2NoNoNo
        Fortier I (1995)1341180.98 (0.75 to 1.27)Shift work vs day onlyNot statedNoNoNo
        Hanke W (1999)1410641.0 (0.19 to 3.26)Shift work (yes vs no)Not statedNoNoNo
        Nurminen T (1989)347381.5 (1.0 to 2.4)Shift work (yes vs no)Most of pregnancyNoYesNo
Lifting
    Cohort studies
        Ahlborg GJ (1990)533890.65 (0.24 to 1.77)⩾12 kg >50 x/wk vs noneNot statedNoNoNo
        Magann EF (2005)264850.81 (0.47 to 1.41)⩾4 vs <4 h/dTrimester 1NoNoNo
        Pompeii LA (2005)3811761.2 (0.7 to 2.0)Lifting ⩾25 lbs⩾13 vs 0 x/wkTrimester 1NoNoNo
        Pompeii LA (2005)3811761.2 (0.6 to 2.2)Lifting ⩾25 lbs⩾13 vs 0 x/wkTrimester 2NoNoNo
        Tuntiseranee P (1998)5211080.5 (0.1 to 1.7)>12 kg, 1–10 x/d vs none15–28 weeksNoYesNo
    Cross-sectional studies
        Fortier I (1995)1330781.03 (0.71 to 1.51)⩾10 kg vs noneNot statedNoNoNo
Standing
    Cohort studies
        Launer LJ (1990)2350351.21 (1.02 to 1.44)Standing vs sittingNot statedNoYesNo
        Magann EF (2005)263180.59 (0.20 to 1.74)Lifting ⩾11 kg >6 x/hTrimester 1NoNoNo
        Pompeii LA (2005)389771.1 (0.7 to 1.7)>30 vs 6–15 h/wkTrimester 1NoNoNo
        Pompeii LA (2005)389771.0 (0.6 to 1.5)>30 vs 6–15 h/wkTrimester 2NoNoNo
        Tuntiseranee P (1998)5211212.0 (0.7 to 5.4)⩾5 vs ⩽4 h/d15–28 weeksNoYesNo
    Cross-sectional studies
        Ceron-Mireles P (1996)1123791.4 (1.03 to 1.91)>7 vs ⩽7 h/dNot statedNoYesNo
        Fortier I (1995)1335021.42 (1.02 to 1.95)⩾6 vs <3 h/dNot statedNoNoNo
        Hanke W (1999)1410640.89 (0.48 to 1.62)Mostly standing posture at work (yes vs no)Not statedNoNoNo
        Nurminen T (1989)356761.0 (0.4 to 2.3)Standing work vs sedentaryTrimester 3NoYesNo
Physical activity
    Cohort studies
        Launer LJ (1990)2350351.32 (1.12 to 1.56)Manual vs office workNot statedNoYesNo
        Magann EF (1996)255310.8 (0.42 to 1.45)>2900 vs <2300 kcal/day energy expenditure16–18 weeksNoYesNo
        Tuntiseranee P (1998)523460.7 (0.20 to 3.2)High vs low15–28 weeksNoYesNo
    Cross-sectional studies
        Ceron-Mireles P (1996)1123791.4 (1.03 to 1.91)>7 vs ⩽7 h/dNot statedNoYesNo
        Fortier I (1995)1318290.87 (0.56 to 1.35)Important vs noneNot statedNoNoNo
        Hanke W (1999)1410640.89 (0.48 to 1.62)Mostly standing posture at work (yes vs no)Not statedNoNoNo
        Nurminen T (1989)355242.4 (1.3 to 4.6)Work with a moderate physical load vs sedentaryTrimester 3NoYesNo