MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1598382662 · doi:10.1186/s13643-015-0051-1

Outcomes in the offspring of mothers with pre-diabetes during pregnancy: a protocol for a systematic review

2015· review· en· W1598382662 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Rukia Swaleh, Ling Zeng, Lawrence Mbuagbaw, Katherine M. Morrison

Bibliographic record

VenueSystematic Reviews · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersChildren's Hospital FoundationMcMaster University
KeywordsMedicineOffspringProtocol (science)PregnancyDiabetes mellitusSystematic reviewObstetricsMEDLINEAlternative medicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Despite the increasing prevalence of pre-diabetes worldwide, there is insufficient literature on the impact of gestational pre-diabetes on offspring outcomes. The objective of this systematic review is to determine the risk of developing adverse outcomes for the offspring in women with pre-diabetes compared to women with normal glucose levels and women with gestational diabetes mellitus. METHODS/DESIGN: A systematic search of the published literature will be conducted for experimental and observational studies that report outcomes in the offspring of mothers with pre-diabetes during pregnancy. Databases including EMBASE, PsycINFO, and PubMed will be searched from 1979 (the year when the terms impaired glucose tolerance and pre-diabetes were coined) to December 2014. Screening of identified articles and data extraction will be conducted in duplicate and independently. Methodological quality of the included studies will be assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Discrepancies will be resolved by consensus or by consulting a third author. Meta-analyses will be performed, and findings will be reported according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) and the meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines. DISCUSSION: Determining the effect of pre-diabetes on offspring outcome will be important for clinicians providing care to pregnant women and their offspring. This review will also identify any gaps in the current literature on this topic and provide direction for future research in this area of study. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42015015536.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablehigh
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Systematic reviewhigh
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.074
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.089
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0740.089
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0170.018
Bibliometrics0.0140.013
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.008
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0080.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0520.007

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.111
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.322 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designNot applicable · Systematic review
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSystematic ReviewsSame topicGestational Diabetes Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207