MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143341711 · doi:10.1345/aph.1k577

Safety of Glyburide for Gestational Diabetes: A Meta-Analysis of Pregnancy Outcomes

2008· review· en· W2143341711 on OpenAlexaff
Myla E. Moretti, Massoud Rezvani, Gideon Koren

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Pharmacotherapy · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGestational diabetesNeonatal hypoglycemiaHypoglycemiaObstetricsPregnancyNeonatal intensive care unitGestational ageBirth weightOdds ratioDiabetes mellitusMeta-analysisCohort studyFetal macrosomiaGestationPediatricsInternal medicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Gestational diabetes mellitus affects approximately 4% of all pregnancies. As with other oral hypoglycemics, the use of glyburide in pregnancy has been limited by fears of neonatal hypoglycemia following fetal exposure. Recent experimental and clinical studies have suggested, however, that the drug is not detectable in umbilical blood. OBJECTIVE: To determine the safety of glyburide use in pregnancy in the treatment of gestational diabetes compared with insulin therapy by analyzing all available human studies. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized and cohort studies that reported on the perinatal complications among women with gestational diabetes who received glyburide versus insulin. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and biological abstracts using BIOSIS previews were searched from inception of these databases through October 2006. The following outcomes were included: macrosomia, birthweight, gestational age, neonatal hypoglycemia, and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions. Odds ratios were calculated by the random effects method using Cochrane's Review Manager version 4.3. RESULTS: Nine studies met the inclusion criteria, including a total of 745 glyburideexposed pregnancies and 637 insulin-exposed pregnancies, with each adverse perinatal outcome reported by 4-7 studies. The use of glyburide was not associated with risk of macrosomia (OR 1.07; 95% CI 0.78 to 1.47), differences in birth weight (weighted mean difference [WMD] OR 20.46 g; 95% CI -34.90 to 75.82), rate of large for gestational age (OR 1.04; 95% CI 0.75 to 1.43), differences in gestational age at birth (WMD 0.02 wk; 95% CI -0.23 to 0.26), ICU admission (OR 0.95; 95% CI 0.43 to 2.09), or increased risk of neonatal hypoglycemia (OR 1.24; 95% CI 0.91 to 1.69). CONCLUSIONS: The data shown here do not suggest increased perinatal risks with glyburide. The effectiveness and safety of glyburide require further evaluation, as most studies to date were not randomized.

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 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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0170.058
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.356
GPT teacher head0.515
Teacher spread0.159 · 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

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations111
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of PharmacotherapySame topicGestational Diabetes Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207