MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2896449912 · doi:10.1136/bjsports-2018-099829

Glucose responses to acute and chronic exercise during pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2018· review· en· W2896449912 on OpenAlexafffund
Margie H. Davenport, Frances Sobierajski, Michelle F. Mottola, Rachel J. Skow, Victoria L. Meah, Veronica J. Poitras, Casey Gray, Alejandra Jaramillo Garcia, Nick Barrowman, Laurel Riske, Marina James, Taniya S. Nagpal, Andrée-Anne Marchand, Linda Slater, Kristi B. Adamo, Gregory Davies, Ruben Barakat, Stéphanie-May Ruchat

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Sports Medicine · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioChildren’s Health Research InstituteWestern UniversityUniversity of OttawaWomen and Children’s Health Research InstituteUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsMeta-analysisMedicinePregnancyMEDLINEObstetricsInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the relationship between prenatal exercise and glycaemic control. Design Systematic review with random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression. Data sources Online databases were searched up to 6 January 2017. Study eligibility criteria Studies of all designs were included (except case studies and reviews) if they were published in English, Spanish or French, and contained information on the population (pregnant women without contraindication to exercise), intervention (subjective or objective measures of frequency, intensity, duration, volume or type of acute or chronic exercise, alone (‘exercise-only’) or in combination with other intervention components (eg, dietary; ‘exercise+cointervention’) at any stage of pregnancy), comparator (no exercise or different frequency, intensity, duration, volume and type of exercise) and outcome (glycaemic control). Results A total of 58 studies (n=8699) were included. There was ‘very low’ quality evidence showing that an acute bout of exercise was associated with a decrease in maternal blood glucose from before to during exercise (6 studies, n=123; mean difference (MD) −0.94 mmol/L, 95% CI −1.18 to −0.70, I 2 =41%) and following exercise (n=333; MD −0.57 mmol/L, 95% CI −0.72 to −0.41, I 2 =72%). Subgroup analysis showed that there were larger decreases in blood glucose following acute exercise in women with diabetes (n=26; MD −1.42, 95% CI −1.69 to −1.16, I 2 =8%) compared with those without diabetes (n=285; MD −0.46, 95% CI −0.60 to −0.32, I 2 =62%). Finally, chronic exercise-only interventions reduced fasting blood glucose compared with no exercise postintervention in women with diabetes (2 studies, n=70; MD −2.76, 95% CI −3.18 to −2.34, I 2 =52%; ‘low’ quality of evidence), but not in those without diabetes (9 studies, n=2174; MD −0.05, 95% CI −0.16 to 0.05, I 2 =79%). Conclusion Acute and chronic prenatal exercise reduced maternal circulating blood glucose concentrations, with a larger effect in women with diabetes.

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)0.041
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0260.046
Bibliometrics0.0080.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Citations86
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicGestational Diabetes Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207