MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404366454 · doi:10.1186/s12902-024-01781-4

Impact of gestational diabetes mellitus on women’s sexual function: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2024· review· en· W4404366454 on OpenAlex
Mahsa Maghalian, Mojgan Mirghafourvand‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Endocrine Disorders · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of TabrizTabriz University of Medical Sciences
KeywordsMedicineGestational diabetesDiabetes mellitusMeta-analysisSexual functionSystematic reviewObstetricsMEDLINEPregnancyInternal medicineEndocrinologyGestation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is a prevalent pregnancy complication with well-established adverse effects on maternal and fetal health. However, research on its impact on sexual health is inconsistent. Currently, there is no comprehensive review on sexual function in pregnant women with GDM. The purpose of this study is to systematically gather and synthesize the available evidence, addressing this important research gap. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis utilized a comprehensive literature search strategy and incorporated the following databases: the Cochrane Library, Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, SID, and Google Scholar. The search was conducted until February 21, 2024. The quality of the cross-sectional and case‒control studies included in the current study was evaluated via the modified and standard Newcastle‒Ottawa scale. The certainty of the evidence was evaluated via the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) framework. A meta-regression was conducted to examine the variables that influence total sexual function. Additionally, sequential analysis was performed to determine the required information size for the meta-analysis. RESULTS: The systematic search process yielded a total of 370 studies. The final analysis included six studies. The meta-analysis findings revealed that compared with controls, women with GDM had significantly lower total scores for sexual function (SMD - 1.80, 95% CI -3.44 to -0.15, p = 0.03), sexual desire (SMD - 5.14, 95% CI -8.14 to -2.14, p < 0.001), arousal (SMD - 0.58, 95% CI -0.95 to -0.21, p = 0.002), lubrication (MD -0.41, 95% CI -0.59 to -0.22, p < 0.001) and satisfaction (SMD - 3.82, 95% CI -6.08 to -1.57, p < 0.001). However, the analysis did not reveal statistically significant differences in sexual pain, or orgasm between the GDM and control groups. The meta-regression analysis revealed that older age in the control group was associated with poorer sexual function. CONCLUSION: Compared with control women, pregnant women diagnosed with GDM have lower sexual function. Further research with larger sample sizes is necessary to enhance the robustness of the evidence, given the low level of certainty. Healthcare providers should focus on the sexual well-being of women with GDM and create tailored interventions to address their specific needs.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.700
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.302 · 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