MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405691845 · doi:10.3389/fendo.2024.1486861

Prevalence and risk factors for type 2 diabetes mellitus in women with gestational diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2024· review· en· W4405691845 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kaiqi Chen, Lichao Tang, Xin Wei Wang, Yunhua Li, Xijian Zhang, Shikui Cui, Wei Chen, Danping Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Endocrinology · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChengdu UniversityChengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine
KeywordsMedicineGestational diabetesOdds ratioConfidence intervalBody mass indexMeta-analysisType 2 Diabetes MellitusCochrane LibraryDiabetes mellitusPregnancyInternal medicineObstetricsEndocrinologyGestation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: This study aims to explore the risk factors in the progression of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) to type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Material and methods: Relevant studies were comprehensively searched from PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase up to March 12. Data extraction was performed. Differences in risk factors were presented as odds ratios (OR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). The quality of the included studies was assessed through the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality scale. Results: This meta-analysis encompassed 46 studies involving a total of 196,494 patients. The factors most strongly associated with the risk of developing T2DM following GDM were the use of progestin-only contraceptives (odds ratio [OR]: 2.12, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.00-4.45, P = 0.049), recurrence of GDM (OR: 2.63, 95% CI = 1.88-3.69, P < 0.001), insulin use during pregnancy (OR: 4.35, 95% CI = 3.17-5.96, P < 0.001), pre-pregnancy body mass index (BMI) (OR: 2.97, 95% CI = 2.16-4.07, P < 0.001), BMI after delivery (OR: 4.17, 95% CI = 2.58-6.74, P < 0.001), macrosomia (OR: 3.30, 95% CI = 1.45-7.49, P = 0.04), hypertension (OR: 5.19, 95% CI = 1.31-20.51, P = 0.019), and HbA1c levels (OR: 3.32, 95% CI = 1.81-6.11, P < 0.001). Additionally, age (OR: 1.71, 95% CI = 1.23-2.38, P = 0.001), family history of diabetes (OR: 1.47, 95% CI = 1.27-1.70, P < 0.001), BMI during pregnancy (OR: 1.06, 95% CI = 1.00-1.12, P = 0.056), fasting blood glucose (FBG) (OR: 1.58, 95% CI = 1.36-1.84, P < 0.001), 1-hour oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) (OR: 1.38, 95% CI = 1.02-1.87, P = 0.037), and 2-hour OGTT (OR: 1.54, 95% CI = 1.28-1.58, P < 0.001) were identified as moderate-risk factors for the development of T2DM. Conclusion: The systematic review and meta-analysis identified several moderate- to high-risk factors associated with the progression of T2DM in individuals with a history of GDM. These risk factors include the use of progestin-only contraceptives, pre-pregnancy BMI, BMI after delivery, macrosomia, hypertension, persistently elevated levels of HbA1c, fasting blood glucose (FBG), 1-hour and 2-hour oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTT), age, and family history of diabetes. Our findings serve as evidence for the early prevention and clinical intervention of the progression from GDM to T2DM and offer valuable insights to guide healthcare professionals in formulating customized management and treatment strategies for female patients with diverse forms of GDM. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42024545200.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0210.037
Bibliometrics0.0080.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.290 · 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
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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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