Postnatal testing for diabetes in Australian women following gestational diabetes mellitus
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Postnatal blood glucose testing is recommended for reclassification of glucose tolerance following a pregnancy affected by gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM); however, there are limited data on the postnatal follow-up sought by Australian women. AIMS: To describe postnatal diabetes testing patterns in Australian women following a pregnancy affected by GDM and identify factors associated with return for follow-up testing in accordance with the Australasian Diabetes in Pregnancy Society (ADIPS) guidelines. METHODS: A cross-sectional self-administered survey of 1372 women diagnosed with GDM between 2003 and 2005, sampled from the National Diabetes Services Scheme database. RESULTS: Postnatal diabetes testing was reported by 73.2% of survey respondents with 27.4% returning for an oral glucose test tolerance at six to eight weeks post-GDM pregnancy. Using logistic regression analysis, factors associated with appropriate postnatal testing were receiving individualised risk reduction advice (odds ratio (OR) 1.41 (1.08,1.84)) or written information (OR 1.35 (1.03,1.76)) and in two-way interactions, being under the care of an endocrinologist and not tertiary educated (OR 2.09 (1.49,2.93)) as well as seeing an obstetrician and diabetes educator during pregnancy (OR 1.72 (1.19,2.48)). Every five years increase in age reduced the likelihood of a woman returning for testing by 17%. CONCLUSIONS: Specialist diabetes care in non-tertiary educated women, or a team approach to management with diabetes education and obstetric care may act to reinforce the need for postnatal diabetes testing in accordance with the ADIPS guidelines. Individualised follow up from a health professional and provision of written information following a GDM pregnancy may also encourage return for postnatal testing in this high-risk group.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it