Maternal glucose tolerance in pregnancy and child cognitive and behavioural problems in early and mid‐childhood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Maternal abnormal glucose tolerance during pregnancy may adversely affect offspring cognition and behaviour, but few prospective studies investigated this association at multiple points throughout childhood. OBJECTIVES: We hypothesised that maternal abnormal glucose tolerance is associated with child cognitive and behavioural outcomes in early and mid-childhood. METHODS: We examined the associations of maternal abnormal glucose tolerance at 26-28 weeks of pregnancy with offspring cognitive and behavioural scores in 1421 children in the Project Viva pre-birth cohort. In early (mean 3.3 years) and mid-childhood (mean 7.9 years), we measured child cognition using validated instruments, the Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test, Wide Range Assessment of Memory and Learning, and the Wide Range Assessment of Visual Motor Abilities (WRAVMA); we assessed parent- and teacher-rated behavioural outcomes with the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire and the Behavioural Rating Inventory of Executive Function. We used linear regression models adjusted for potential confounders (maternal race/ethnicity, pre-pregnancy BMI, intelligence, age, parity, smoking status, education, and household income at enrolment, in addition to child's sex and age at assessment). RESULTS: Of 1421 mothers, 69 (4.9%) had gestational diabetes mellitus, 43 (3.0%) impaired glucose tolerance, 122 (8.6%) isolated hyperglycaemia, and 1187 (83.5%) normal glucose tolerance. Offspring born to women with gestational diabetes mellitus had lower total WRAVMA scores (-3.09 points; 95% CI -6.12, -0.05) in early childhood compared with offspring of women with normal glucose tolerance. None of the abnormal glucose tolerance categories during pregnancy were associated with any of the cognitive outcomes (verbal, non-verbal, and visual motor scores) or behavioural measures in mid-childhood. CONCLUSIONS: Children born to mothers who had gestational diabetes mellitus had slightly lower scores on one cognitive test in early childhood. We found no evidence to support that maternal abnormal glucose tolerance was associated with cognitive or behavioural development in mid-childhood.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".