The prognostic value of the oral glucose tolerance test for future type-2 diabetes in nulliparous pregnant women testing negative for gestational diabetes.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To determine the prognostic value of the antepartum 75g-oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) for future type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in nulliparous pregnant women who tested negative for GDM. METHODS: A population-based retrospective cohort study of nulliparous pregnant women who underwent testing for GDM using a 75g-OGTT in Ontario, Canada (2007-2017). The overwhelming majority of women in Ontario undergo screening using the preferred 2-step approach where the 75g-OGTT is performed following an abnormal non-fasting 1 h 50g-glucose challenge test. The relationship between the 75g-OGTT results in women who tested negative for GDM (defined as normal glucose at fasting, 1 and 2 h post 75g-glucose load) and future T2DM (as recorded in the Ontario Diabetes Database by the end date of follow up period) was explored. FINDINGS: Of the 162,622 women who underwent 75g-OGTT during the study period, there were 41,507 (75.0%) who met the study criteria. In women without GDM, the adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) for T2DM were-At fasting 2.82 (95%-CI 2.18-3.64), at 1 h 1.26 (1.15-1.37), at 2 h 1.14 (1.04-1.25) for a 1 mmol/L increase in glucose. A model that combined all 3 OGTT values and clinical characteristics could detect 43% (42.6%-43.4%) of those who developed T2DM at 5-years post the index pregnancy for a false-positive rate of 20%. INTERPRETATION: The results of the antepartum OGTT can be used to refine the future risk of T2DM even in nulliparous pregnant women who tested negative for GDM.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".