MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3000436666 · doi:10.1017/s2040174419000850

Cardiovascular risk factors in offspring exposed to gestational diabetes mellitus <i>in utero</i>: systematic review and meta-analysis

2020· review· en· W3000436666 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maleesa Pathirana, Zohra S Lassi, Claire T. Roberts, Prabha H. Andraweera

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Developmental Origins of Health and Disease · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGestational diabetesMedicineOffspringObstetricsBody mass indexPregnancyDiabetes mellitusBlood pressureMeta-analysisInternal medicineEndocrinologyGestation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is a pregnancy complication that affects one in seven pregnancies. Emerging evidence demonstrates that children born of pregnancies complicated by GDM may be at increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in adulthood. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine cardiovascular risk factors in offspring exposed to GDM in utero. PubMed, CINAHL, SCOPUS, and EMBASE databases were searched. Information was extracted on established CVD risk factors including blood pressure, lipids, blood glucose, fasting insulin, body mass index (BMI), and endothelial/microvascular function. The review protocol is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42018094983). Prospective and retrospective studies comparing offspring exposed to GDM compared to controls (non-GDM pregnancies) were considered. We included studies that defined GDM based on the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) definition, or prior definitions. The PRISMA guidelines were followed in conducting this systematic review. Methodological quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. Study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment were done by two independent reviewers. The data were pooled using a random-effects model. Of 59 eligible studies, 24 were included in the meta-analysis. Offspring exposed to GDM had higher systolic blood pressure (mean difference (MD): 1.75 mmHg, 95% CI 0.57-2.94; eight studies, 7264 participants), BMI z-score (MD 0.11, 95% CI 0.02-0.20; nine studies, 8759 participants), and glucose (standard MD 0.43, 95% CI 0.08-0.77; 11 studies, 6423 participants) than control participants. In conclusion, offspring exposed to GDM have elevated systolic blood pressure, BMI, and glucose. Those exposed to GDM in utero may benefit from early childhood blood pressure measurements.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.809
Threshold uncertainty score0.860

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
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

Citations83
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Developmental Origins of Health and DiseaseSame topicGestational Diabetes Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207