Postpartum Metabolic Function in Women Delivering a Macrosomic Infant in the Absence of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated with fetal macrosomia and maternal postpartum dysglycemia, insulin resistance, and β-cell dysfunction. Indeed, in practice, a prior pregnancy that resulted in a large-for-gestational-age (LGA) delivery is often considered presumptive evidence of GDM, whether or not it was diagnosed at the time. If this clinical assumption is correct, however, we would expect these women to exhibit postpartum metabolic dysfunction. Thus, to test this hypothesis, we assessed metabolic function during and after pregnancy in a cohort of women stratified according to the presence/absence of GDM and LGA delivery, respectively. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 562 women underwent metabolic characterization, including oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), in late pregnancy and at 3 months' postpartum. The women were stratified into three groups: those with neither GDM nor LGA delivery (nonGDM, n = 364), those without GDM but with LGA delivery (nonGDM-LGA, n = 46), and those with GDM (n = 152). RESULTS: On logistic regression, GDM predicted postpartum glucose intolerance (OR 4.1 [95% CI 2.5-6.8]; P < 0.0001), whereas nonGDM-LGA did not (P = 0.65). At 3 months' postpartum, the mean adjusted levels of fasting glucose and area under the glucose curve on the OGTT were significantly higher in the GDM women compared with either nonGDM or nonGDM-LGA (all P < 0.05), with no differences between the latter two groups. In a similar manner, mean adjusted insulin sensitivity (Matsuda index) and β-cell function (Insulin Secretion-Sensitivity Index-2) were lower in GDM women compared with either nonGDM or nonGDM-LGA (all P < 0.05), again with no differences between the latter two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Women with nonGDM-LGA do not exhibit postpartum metabolic dysfunction, arguing against the assumption of undiagnosed GDM in these patients.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".