MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The impact of family history of diabetes on risk factors for gestational diabetes

2007· article· en· W1969964903 on OpenAlex
Ravi Retnakaran, Philip W. Connelly, Mathew Sermer, Bernard Zinman, Anthony J. Hanley

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Endocrinology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGestational diabetesMedicineAdiponectinInternal medicineDiabetes mellitusType 2 diabetesEndocrinologyFamily historyPregnancyPopulationParity (physics)ObstetricsArea under the curveGynecologyInsulin resistanceGestationBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Familial history of type 2 diabetes (FHD) represents a pathophysiologically unique risk factor for gestational diabetes (GDM), insofar as it encompasses both inherited and lifestyle elements. We thus hypothesized that the risk factors for gestational hyperglycaemia in women with FHD may differ from those in women without FHD. DESIGN/PATIENTS/MEASUREMENTS: GDM risk factors were evaluated in 90 women with FHD and in 83 women without FHD, at the time of oral glucose tolerance testing in late pregnancy. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the two groups in ethnicity, prepregnancy BMI, the insulin-sensitizing protein adiponectin, glucose tolerance status and area-under-the-glucose-curve (AUC(gluc)). In women with FHD, a multiple linear regression model of established GDM risk factors reconciled 35% of the variance in AUC(gluc), with (i) previous GDM (t = 3.74, P = 0.0003) identified as a positive independent determinant and (ii) log adiponectin (t = -3.48, P = 0.0008) and, unexpectedly, parity (t = -3.19, P = 0.0021) emerging as negative independent covariates of AUC(gluc). In contrast, in women without FHD, the same multivariate model reconciled only 15% of the variance in AUC(gluc), with no significant variables identified. Interestingly, in the entire population (n = 173), parity significantly modified the relationship between FHD and AUC(gluc) (FHD-parity interaction: t = -2.29, P = 0.0235). Indeed, FHD was an independent determinant of AUC(gluc) in nulliparous women (n = 91), but not in parous women (n = 82). CONCLUSION: Established risk factors for GDM are relevant in women with FHD but may not be the principal determinants of gestational hyperglycaemia in women without FHD. Moreover, FHD may be more relevant to risk of GDM in nulliparous women than in parous subjects. These findings highlight the complex relationship between FHD and gestational hyperglycaemia, and may hold implications for selective screening for GDM.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.700

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.329 · 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