Incidence of Heart Failure Related to Co-Occurrence of Gestational Hypertensive Disorders and Gestational Diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The extent to which their co-occurrence of gestational hypertensive disorders (GHTD) and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) influences heart failure (HF) risk is unclear. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to characterize the risk of HF related to concomitant GHTD and GDM. METHODS: We conducted a population-based cohort study using the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care of Ontario (Canada) health care administrative databases. We included women with a livebirth singleton delivery between July 1, 2007, and March 31, 2018, and excluded those with prepregnancy diabetes, hypertension, HF, or coronary artery disease. GDM, GHTD, peripartum cardiomyopathy (at index pregnancy) were identified using diagnosis coding. Incident HF was assessed from index pregnancy until March 31, 2020. We estimated associations of GDM and/or GHTD with peripartum cardiomyopathy and incident HF. RESULTS: Among 885,873 women (mean age: 30 years, 54,015 with isolated GDM, 43,750 with isolated GHTD, 4,960 with GDM and GHTD), there were 489 HF events over 8 years. Compared to no-GDM and no-GHTD, isolated GDM (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.44; 95% CI: 1.02-2.04) and isolated GHTD (aHR: 1.65; 95% CI: 1.17-2.31) were associated with a higher risk of incident HF. The co-occurrence of GDM and GHTD was associated with a higher HF risk (aHR: 2.64; 95% CI: 1.24-5.61). GDM and GHTD increased the risk of peripartum cardiomyopathy (adjusted risk ratio [aRR]: 7.30; 95% CI: 6.92-7.58), similarly to isolated GHTD (aRR: 7.40; 95% CI: 7.23-7.58). CONCLUSIONS: The co-occurrence of GDM and GHTD was associated with a significantly high risk of incident HF.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".