Following in mother’s footsteps? Mother–daughter risks for insulin resistance and cardiovascular disease 15 years after gestational diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To determine effects on mothers and daughters of gestational diabetes mellitus/gestational impaired glucose tolerance (GDM/GIGT) on their future metabolic and cardiovascular risks. METHODS: Case mothers who had GDM/GIGT in pregnancy (cases; n = 90) and normoglycaemic control women (n = 99) and their daughters underwent lifestyle assessment and metabolic tests 15-years post-partum. RESULTS: Prevalence of glucose intolerance (GI) in daughters was 1.1%. Maternal prevalence was 44.4% in cases compared to 13.1% in controls, with conversion best predicted by weight gain. Case daughters had higher insulin resistance (IR) and greater waist circumference (WC) (51.2%) relative to control daughters (36.4%, p < 0.05) made worse if case mothers became GI at follow-up (65%) (relative risk =1.8; 95% confidence interval 1.2-2.9). In multivariable linear regression analyses adjusting for daughters' birthweight, maternal obesity (> 30.0 kg/m(2)) at 15years and mothers' case-control status were strong predictors of daughters' WC (p < 0.01; P < 0.01, respectively). For daughters' body mass index (BMI) percentile and percentage of body fat, maternal obesity was a stronger predictor (p < 0.01; p < 0.001)) than mothers' case-control status (p < 0.01; P = 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: GDM/GIGT pregnancies led to increased conversion to GI in mothers, minimal in daughters. Case daughters have increased risk of central adiposity and insulin resistance, whereas maternal obesity strongly predicted daughters' BMI percentile and per cent of body fat. Controlling hyperglycaemia in pregnancy and family weight management may provide the key to preventing offspring obesity and glucose intolerance post GDM/GIGT.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".