MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte

Ramadan and Gestational Diabetes : Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes in Muslim Women

2017· other· en· W6965392497 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueBiblioBoard Library Catalog (Open Research Library) · 2017
Typeother
Langueen
Domaine
Thématique
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésGestational diabetesContext (archaeology)PregnancyAffect (linguistics)IslamDiabetes mellitusChristian ministryMealType 1 diabetesPostpartum period

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Ramadan and Gestational Diabetes: maternal and neonatal outcomes in Muslim women Turki AlMogbel1,2,3, Glynis Ross1,2, Ted Wu1 , Lynda Molyneaux1,2, Maria Constantino1, 2, Margaret McGill1,2, Anna-Jane Harding1, Christine Pech1, Abdullah Alrasheed1,2, Jencia Wong1,21 Diabetes Centre, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia2 Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia3 Buraydah Diabetes Center, King Fahad Specialist Hospital, Ministry of Health, Buraydah, Saudi ArabiaBackgroundGestational diabetes (GDM) has been reported to affect up to 50% of pregnancies in Muslim countries (1). Fasting during the Islamic holy month of Ramadan is one of the five pillars of Islam whereby no food or drink is consumed from dawn to sunset. Despite allowed exemptions from fasting for medical reasons (2), ~50% of Muslim women with GDM still opt to fast, to share the spiritual and social experiences with their family (3, 4). Irrespective of whether fasting is undertaken, meals during Ramadan are often altered in both macronutrient content and size (5, 6). This intermittent fasting and feasting pattern of eating and/or change in meal type in Ramadan, may affect metabolic fuels and adversely impact fetal and maternal outcomes in the context of GDM. There is a paucity of data in this area to guide clinicians.AimTo examine the relationship between exposure to the month of Ramadan in Muslim women with GDM and pregnancy outcomes using systematically and prospectively collected data from a multiethnic GDM database.MethodOutcomes for 345 self-reported Muslim women with singleton pregnancies who attended a major Sydney teaching hospital during the period 1989-2010, were available for study. We examined fetal and maternal outcomes in relation to (i) the number of days exposed to Ramadan (ii) trimester exposure to Ramadan, with those never exposed as comparator in both analyses. Statistical significance was defined as p-value < 0.05. The study protocol was approved by the Hospital ethics committee.ResultsFor the analysis by days of exposure to Ramadan, exposure was divided into never exposed (n=48), exposed for 1-10 days (n=17), 11-20 days (n=23) and 21-30 days (n=257). There were no differences in maternal age, ethnicity, pre-pregnancy BMI, and gestation at diagnosis. Insulin use, maternal weight gain, preterm delivery and caesarean section were similar between the groups (p>0.05 for all). No significant differences in macrosomia, large for gestational age (LGA) or small for gestational age (SGA) infants were seen. There was a trend for an increasing prevalence of neonatal hyperbilirubinemia with more Ramadan days-exposure (ptrend =0.004). The odds ratio (OR) for risk of hyperbilirubinemia was 3.9 (1.1-13.1, p=0.03) for the highest days-exposure group after adjustment for gestational age, ethnicity, gender and birthweight centile. Conversely, exposure to Ramadan was associated with a lower prevalence of neonatal hypoglycemia. The OR for neonatal hypoglycemia was 0.4 (0.2-0.9, p=0.02) for the longest exposure group after adjustment for insulin treatment, gestational age, and birthweight centile. There were 48, 59, 75 and 56 pregnancies with no exposure, purely first, second and third trimester exposure to Ramadan respectively. There were no differences in maternal age, ethnicity, pre-pregnancy BMI between the groups. Differences in gestation at GDM diagnosis and family history of GDM were seen (p< 0.05 for both). Maternal weight gain, preterm delivery and cesarean section were similar between the groups (p>0.05 for all). There were no differences in macrosomia, LGA or SGA by trimester exposure, however there was a significant trend towards increasing neonatal hyperbilirubinemia by later trimester exposure (ptrend =0.02). The OR for hyperbilirubinemia was 4.2 (1.1-15.5, p=0.04) and 5 (1.3-19, p=0.02) for the second and third trimester exposure respectively, after adjustment for gestational age, ethnicity, gender and percentile birth weight. Later trimester exposure to Ramadan was associated with a lower prevalence of neonatal hypoglycemia (ptrend =0.048). The OR for neonatal hypoglycemia was 0.3 for both 2nd and 3rd trimester exposure (p=0.03; p=0.06 respectively) after adjustment for insulin use, gestational age, and birthweight centile. Discussion To our knowledge this is the first study to examine the association of Ramadan and pregnancy outcomes in a large Muslim GDM cohort. No excess in macrosomia, LGA or SGA infants were seen irrespective of the number of days or trimester of exposure which is reassuring. Furthermore, exposure to Ramadan appears to be associated with a lower prevalence of neonatal hypoglycemia implying more favourable glycemic control. However, of concern is the finding of a near four-fold excess of neonatal hyperbilirubinemia after adjustment for known risk factors for those exposed to Ramadan especially in later pregnancy. Whether our findings are specific to fasting per se or the overall altered dietary patterns in Ramadan cannot be determined. These findings indicate a need for further study in GDM. u20031.tAlfadhli EM, Osman EN, Basri TH, Mansuri NS, Youssef MH, Assaaedi SA, et al. Gestational diabetes among Saudi women: prevalence, risk factors and pregnancy outcomes. Annals of Saudi medicine. 2015;35(3):222.2.tAlliance IDFatDI. Diabetes and Ramadan: Practical GuidelinesBrussels, Belgium: International Diabetes Federation; 2016.3.tRobinson T, Raisler J. Each one is a doctor for herself

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Bibliométrie, Communication savante, Science ouverte, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesCommunication savante, Science ouverte, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Autre · Signal consensuel: Autre
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,376
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,000
Bibliométrie0,0240,005
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,002
Communication savante0,0100,018
Science ouverte0,0050,012
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0090,002

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,046
Tête enseignante GPT0,331
Écart entre enseignants0,285 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreAutre

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2017
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBiblioBoard Library Catalog (Open Research Library)Travaux en français237 207