MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308804308 · doi:10.3389/fendo.2022.928508

First Trimester Plasma MicroRNA Levels Predict Risk of Developing Gestational Diabetes Mellitus

2022· article· en· W4308804308 on OpenAlexafffund
Cécilia Légaré, Véronique Desgagné, Kathrine Thibeault, Frédérique White, Andrée‐Anne Clément, Cédrik Poirier, Zhong Cheng Luo, Michelle S. Scott, Pierre‐Étienne Jacques, Patrice Perron, Renée Guérin, Marie‐France Hivert, Luigi Bouchard

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Endocrinology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeUniversity of TorontoLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteMount Sinai HospitalCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Saguenay–Lac-Saint-JeanUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéCompute CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsGestational diabetesLogistic regressionMedicineFamily historyDiabetes mellitusObstetricsStepwise regressionmicroRNAPregnancyInternal medicineBioinformaticsBiologyEndocrinologyGeneGestationGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aims: Our objective is to identify first-trimester plasmatic miRNAs associated with and predictive of GDM. Methods: We quantified miRNA using next-generation sequencing in discovery (Gen3G: n = 443/GDM = 56) and replication (3D: n = 139/GDM = 76) cohorts. We have diagnosed GDM using a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test and the IADPSG criteria. We applied stepwise logistic regression analysis among replicated miRNAs to build prediction models. Results: We identified 17 miRNAs associated with GDM development in both cohorts. The prediction performance of hsa-miR-517a-3p|hsa-miR-517b-3p, hsa-miR-218-5p, and hsa-let7a-3p was slightly better than GDM classic risk factors (age, BMI, familial history of type 2 diabetes, history of GDM or macrosomia, and HbA1c) (AUC 0.78 vs. 0.75). MiRNAs and GDM classic risk factors together further improved the prediction values [AUC 0.84 (95% CI 0.73-0.94)]. These results were replicated in 3D, although weaker predictive values were obtained. We suggest very low and higher risk GDM thresholds, which could be used to identify women who could do without a diagnostic test for GDM and women most likely to benefit from an early GDM prevention program. Conclusions: In summary, three miRNAs combined with classic GDM risk factors provide excellent prediction values, potentially strong enough to improve early detection and prevention of 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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.544

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations14
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in EndocrinologySame topicGestational Diabetes Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207