Screening for gestational diabetes in pregnancy in Northwestern Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: We estimate the screening and prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in a primarily first nations obstetrical population in Northwestern Ontario. METHODS: The study is an 8-year retrospective analysis of all gestational glucose challenge and tolerance tests performed at the Sioux Lookout Meno Ya Win Health Centre (SLMHC) laboratory from 1 January, 2010 to 31 December, 2017. Test, gestational timing and completion rate of screening were recorded, and GDM prevalence was calculated on the tested population. Screening completion rates were recorded for the subset of women who delivered at SLMHC from 2014 to 2017. RESULTS: The average annual GDM prevalence was 12%, double the Ontario rate. Over the 8-year period, 513 patients were diagnosed with GDM among the 4298 patients screened. Patients were screened with the 2-step (90%) or the 1-step (10%) protocol. Screening occurred <20 weeks in 3%; 54% occurred in <28 weeks and 40% >28 weeks. Seventy percent of the tests were from remote nursing stations. The screening completion rate for women delivering at SLMHC in 2017 was 80.8%. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of GDM in Northwestern Ontario is twice the provincial rate. Most screening used the 2-step protocol; early screening was underused. Improvements in screening programming are underway and future research may match surveillance rates and results to GDM outcomes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".