MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406180667 · doi:10.34172/ddj.1608

Pregnancy and Childbirth Outcomes of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Retrospective Cohort Study

2024· article· en· W4406180667 on OpenAlexaff
Fatemeh Darsareh, Malihe Shirzadfard Jahromi, Amene Ranjbar, Mitra Shekari, Vahid Mehrnoush, Nasibeh Roozbeh

Bibliographic record

VenueDisease and Diagnosis · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsNOSM University
FundersHormozgan University of Medical Sciences
KeywordsGestational diabetesMedicineChildbirthObstetricsRetrospective cohort studyPregnancyCohort studyCohortDiabetes mellitusGestationGynecologyInternal medicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Understanding the various outcomes of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is essential for initiating a cascade of preparatory steps to address them. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the pregnancy and childbirth outcomes of GDM. More precisely, the study retrospectively assessed singleton pregnant mothers diagnosed with GDM who gave birth at a tertiary hospital in Bandar Abbas, Iran, between January 1st, 2020, and January 1st, 2022. Materials and Methods: To this end, pregnancy and childbirth outcomes were investigated, including the incidence of the need for induction of labor, placenta abruption, preterm birth, intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR), intrauterine fetal death (IUFD), meconium fluid, fetal distress, methods of delivery, perineal lacerations, and postpartum hemorrhage. The other outcomes were childbirth injury, shoulder dystocia, macrosomia, low birth weight, congenital malformation, neonatal asphyxia, need for cardiac and respiratory resuscitation, transfer to a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), and newborn death. Results: The records of 7748 eligible mothers were included in the analysis. GDM was diagnosed in 1,087 (14%) mothers. Age was the only sociodemographic factor that significantly differed between GDM and non-GDM mothers. GDM mothers had a significantly higher risk of macrosomia (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 2.94, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.71–4.61, P<0.001), labor induction (aOR: 3.14, 95% CI: 1.72–6.95, P<0.001), instrumental delivery (aOR: 3.16, 95% CI: 1.51–3.87, P<0.001), IUFD (aOR: 1.95, 95% CI: 1.17–3.06, P<0.01), and NICU admission (aOR: 2.19, 95% CI: 0.99–3.82, P<0.01). Other common complications, such as cesarean section (CS), postpartum hemorrhage, shoulder dystocia, childbirth trauma, and extensive perineal lacerations, were not significantly different between GDM and non-GDM mothers. Conclusion: Despite the higher incidence of labor induction and instrumental delivery, no significant association was found between GDM and adverse maternal outcomes. Regarding neonatal outcomes, GDM was linked to macrosomia, IUFD, and NICU admission.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.318

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDisease and DiagnosisSame topicGestational Diabetes Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207