Assessing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on uptake and experiences of gestational diabetes mellitus screening in Ontario: A parallel convergent mixed-methods study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is a common medical complication of pregnancy that leads to adverse outcomes for both infants and pregnant people. Early detection and treatment can mitigate these negative outcomes. The COVID-19 pandemic strained healthcare and laboratory services, including GDM screening programs. Adapted GDM screening guidelines were introduced in many jurisdictions. This study examined changes in uptake, modality, and experiences of GDM screening in Ontario, Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This convergent mixed-method study involved a population-based retrospective cohort analysis of Ontario-based health administrative data to describe and compare gestational diabetes screening rates among 85,228 individuals with live, in-hospital births between January 1-March 31 before (2019) and during the COVID-19 pandemic (2021 and 2022). Descriptive analyses were conducted for GDM screening pathways aligning with usual and pandemic-adapted screening guidance. Qualitative descriptive interviews were conducted about experiences and decision-making of GDM screening with 43 Ontario residents who gave birth between May 2020 and December 2021. Data were integrated during the design and interpretation phases. RESULTS: There were small but significant increases in GDM screening during the pandemic; likelihood of screening completion using any modality increased in 2021 and 2022 compared to 2019. Testing modality shifted; the alternate screening strategies introduced during COVID-19 were adopted by clinicians. Interview participants perceived GDM screening to be important and obligatory but accompanied by a degree of stress about potential COVID-19 exposure. CONCLUSION: Despite health system challenges experienced in Ontario during the COVID-19 pandemic, GDM screening rates increased in the study population, demonstrating the success of adapted GDM screening guidelines. Decisions about screening modalities were driven by clinician expertise, and interview participants were satisfied to provide informed consent to these recommendations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".