MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407630541 · doi:10.1186/s12884-025-07230-x

The TANGO-DM randomized controlled trial study protocol: treatment outcomes for gestational diabetes diagnosed according to WHO 2013 or WHO 1999 thresholds

2025· article· en· W4407630541 on OpenAlexaff
Doortje Rademaker, Leon de Wit, Eline van den Akker, Babette A. M. Braams‐Lisman, Remke C. Dullemond, Inge M. Evers, Sander Galjaard, Brenda Hermsen, Marion van Hoorn, Anjoke Huisjes, Joepe J. Kaandorp, Annemiek Lub, Simone Lunshof, Flip van der Made, Remco G.W. Nijman, Judith van Laar, Karlijn C. Vollebregt, Joost Velzel, Floortje Vlemmix, Michelle E.M.H. Westerhuis, Lia D. E. Wijnberger, Maurice G.A.J. Wouters, Joost J. Zwart, Judith E. Bosmans, Patrick Bossuyt, Ruben G. Duijnhoven, Enrico Lopriore, Esteriek de Miranda, Corine Verhoeven, Ben Willem Mol, Arie Franx, J. Hans DeVries, Bas B. van Rijn, Rebecca C. Painter

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Pregnancy and Childbirth · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsWomen's Health Research Institute
FundersUniversitair Medisch Centrum GroningenVrije Universiteit AmsterdamAmsterdam University Medical CentersRijksuniversiteit GroningenMonash UniversityUniversiteit van AmsterdamUniversiteit LeidenUniversity of Aberdeen
KeywordsMedicineGestational diabetesRandomized controlled trialPregnancyObstetricsGestational ageBirth weightReproductive medicineDiabetes mellitusPediatricsGestationInternal medicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), or hyperglycemia first diagnosed in pregnancy, affects 7-10% of all pregnancies worldwide. Perinatal risk rises with increasing glycemia at oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT). The new (2013) WHO criteria recommend a lower fasting, and a higher post-load threshold for GDM diagnosis in comparison to the old (1999) WHO criteria. To date, however, outcomes of GDM treatment for those affected by the altered diagnostic criteria, has not been well investigated. We hypothesized that intensive GDM treatment according to the new (2013) GDM criteria would result in a reduction in infants with birth weight > 90th centile (large for gestational age, LGA), in comparison to treatment according to the old criteria (1999). METHODS: The TANGO-DM trial is an open label, multicenter randomized controlled trial. Participants are pregnant with a gestational age between 16 + 0 and 32 + 0 weeks, who underwent a 1-step venous 2- or 3-point 75-gram oral OGTT, were eligible if they had glucose concentrations discordant between the old (1999) and the new (2013) criteria. After informed consent, women are randomized to either intensive GDM treatment, consisting of dietary advice and glucose monitoring and, if euglycemia is not reached, antihyperglycemic agents, or normal obstetric care without GDM treatment. The primary outcome is large-for-gestational-age infants (birth weight > 90th percentile). Secondary outcome measures include maternal complications, obstetric complications, neonatal complications, obstetric interventions, quality of life, and healthcare and societal costs. Outcomes will be analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle. The study is powered to detect a reduction in LGA from 16% in the untreated to 10% in the treated group, which requires 1032 participants (516 per arm; alpha-error 5% for 80% power). DISCUSSION: The TANGO-DM trial will provide high-level evidence to support or refute the use of the new 2013 WHO diagnostic criteria in terms of their ability to lower the number of large for gestational age infants and/or improve maternal and perinatal outcomes and/or costs in women with gestational diabetes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Central Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects (CCMO) (NL63013.018.18). Registered on 22 September 2018.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.163

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0490.005

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Pregnancy and ChildbirthSame topicGestational Diabetes Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207