Gestational Diabetes and Postpartum Physical Activity: Evidence of Lifestyle Change 1 Year After Delivery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) are advised to incorporate physical activity into their lifestyle in order to reduce their risk of developing type 2 diabetes (T2DM), it is recognized that new mothers face barriers to postpartum exercise. Thus, we sought to determine whether, following the diagnosis of GDM, women indeed alter their postpartum physical activity patterns, as compared to their peers without GDM. In this prospective observational cohort study, we assessed the physical activity patterns of 238 white women (58 with GDM, 180 without GDM) in the year before pregnancy and in the year following delivery, using the Baecke questionnaire, which evaluates the following three domains of physical activity: work, sport activity, and nonsport leisure-time activity. Before diagnosis with GDM, women reported lower pregravid sport (P = 0.010) and leisure-time activity (P = 0.013), compared to their peers without GDM. By 1 year postpartum, however, there were no longer significant differences between the GDM and non-GDM groups in either sport or leisure-time activity (P = 0.078 and P = 0.957, respectively). In particular, women with GDM significantly increased their leisure-time activity over the first year postpartum (F = 10.1, P = 0.002), whereas the non-GDM group did not (F = 0.00, P = 0.984). Indeed, on multiple linear regression analysis, GDM independently predicted an increase in leisure-time activity between 1 year pregravid and 1 year postpartum (t = 2.55, P = 0.012). Furthermore, this significant relationship persisted even after adjustment for the finding of prediabetes/diabetes at 3 months postpartum (t = 2.83, P = 0.005). In conclusion, women with GDM successfully increased their leisure-time activity in the first year postpartum, reflecting an element of lifestyle change following this diagnosis.
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
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".