Gestational diabetes and risk of cardiovascular disease: a scoping review.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Gestational diabetes mellitus is associated with an increased risk of incident type 2 diabetes and has deleterious effects on other cardiovascular risk factors. However, the effect of gestational diabetes on the risk of cardiovascular disease remains unclear. We conducted a scoping review of the literature to examine the association between these 2 conditions. METHODS: We systematically searched the PubMed and Embase databases for studies examining the association between gestational diabetes and cardiovascular disease. We restricted our search to studies involving humans that were published in English or French. Outcomes of interest included acute coronary syndromes, angina, arrhythmia, coronary artery disease, heart failure, myocardial infarction, stroke, and composite end points with these outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 11 publications (3 cohort studies [1 published as an abstract], 2 cross-sectional studies, 1 case-control study [published as an abstract], 4 narrative reviews, and 1 editorial) met our inclusion criteria. The 2 cohort studies published as full manuscripts were conducted in overlapping populations. The included studies reported a range of adjusted relative risks for incident cardiovascular disease, from not significant to 1.85 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.21 to 2.82). Adjustment for subsequent type 2 diabetes mellitus attenuated the effects but with wide 95% CIs that spanned unity (range 1.13 [95% CI 0.67 to 1.89] to 1.56 [95% CI 1.00 to 2.43]). INTERPRETATION: Available data suggest that gestational diabetes is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease. However, these data are limited, and evidence regarding this association independent of the increased risk due to subsequent type 2 diabetes and other risk factors for cardiovascular disease remains inconclusive.
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 | 0.011 | 0.047 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".