MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317436324 · doi:10.1002/dmrr.3612

Maternal and cord blood betatrophin (angiopoietin‐like protein 8) in pregnant women with gestational diabetes and normoglycemic controls: A systematic review, meta‐analysis, and meta‐regression

2023· review· en· W4317436324 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Faustino R. Pérez‐López, Junhua Yuan, Manuel Sánchez‐Prieto, María T. López‐Baena, Gonzalo R. Pérez‐Roncero, Seshadri Reddy Varikasuvu

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipid metabolism and disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGestational diabetesMeta-analysisCord bloodObstetricsPregnancyBody mass indexInternal medicineDiabetes mellitusCochrane LibraryEndocrinologyGestation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aims This systematic review and meta‐analysis examined maternal and cord blood betatrophin levels in pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and normoglycemic controls. Material and Methods PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, LILACS, WangFang, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure were searched for literature from inception until May 2022. The primary outcomes were maternal and cord blood betatrophin levels. A random‐effect meta‐analysis was used to estimate the pooled results. The mean differences (MDs) or standardised MDs (SMD) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. I 2 tests were used to evaluate the heterogeneity. The quality of studies was evaluated using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Results Betatrophin levels were reported in 22 studies with a total of 3034 pregnant women, and in seven studies including cord blood from 456 infants. Women with GDM display higher betatrophin levels than the normoglycemic controls (SMD = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.38–1.31) during the second half of the pregnancy. The sensitivity analysis indicated that no single study had significantly influenced the betatrophin overall outcomes. There was heterogeneity between the studies as evidenced by high I 2 values. Meta‐regression analysis indicated a significant regression coefficient for maternal betatrophin and glycosilated haemoglobin. There was no significant difference in cord blood betatrophin in infants from women with and without GDM (SMD = 0.34, 95% CI: −0.15–0.83). Women with GDM also had significantly higher insulin, glucose, glycosylated haemoglobin, HOMA‐IR, LDL‐cholesterol, HDL‐cholesterol, triglycerides, and body mass index compared with the normoglycemic controls. Conclusions Maternal betatrophin levels were higher in women with GDM than in the normoglycemic controls. There was no difference in cord blood betatrophin. Systematic Review Registration PROSPERO CRD42022311372.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0210.041
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetes/Metabolism Research and ReviewsSame topicLipid metabolism and disordersFrench-language works237,207