MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311970897 · doi:10.3390/nu14245232

Effects of a Lifestyle Intervention in Young Women with GDM and Subsequent Diabetes

2022· article· en· W4311970897 on OpenAlexaff
Gang Hu, Huikun Liu, Junhong Leng, Leishen Wang, Weiqin Li, Shuang Zhang, Wěi Li, Gongshu Liu, Huiguang Tian, Shengping Yang, Zhijie Yu, Xilin Yang, Jaakko Tuomilehto

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrients · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiet and metabolism studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNational Institute of Environmental Health SciencesNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Institute of General Medical Sciences
KeywordsDiabetes mellitusMedicineIntervention (counseling)GerontologyEndocrinologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to examine whether a 9-month intensive lifestyle intervention could lead to weight loss and improve cardiovascular risk factors among young women with both gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and newly diagnosed diabetes. A total of 83 young women, who had GDM and were subsequently diagnosed as type 2 diabetes at an average of 2.6 years after delivery, participated in a 9-month intensive lifestyle intervention and a follow-up survey at 6-9 years postintervention. After the 9-month intervention, these women had a weight loss of 2.90 kg (-4.02% of initial weight), decreased waist circumference (-3.12 cm), body fat (-1.75%), diastolic blood pressure (-3.49 mmHg), fasting glucose (-0.98 mmol/L) and HbA1c (-0.72%). During the 6-9 years postintervention period, they still had lower weight (-3.71 kg; -4.62% of initial weight), decreased waist circumference (-4.56 cm) and body fat (-2.10%), but showed a slight increase in HbA1c (0.22%). The prevalence of using glucose-lowering agents increased from 2.4% at baseline to 34.6% after the 9-month lifestyle intervention, and to 48.4% at 6-9 years postintervention. A 9-month intensive lifestyle intervention can produce beneficial effects on body weight, HbA1c and other cardiovascular risk factors among young women with previous GDM who subsequently developed new diabetes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNutrientsSame topicDiet and metabolism studiesFrench-language works237,207