Gestational Diabetes Mellitus and Heart Failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The extent of the association between gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and the incidence of heart failure (HF) largely remains unclear. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to synthesize the evidence on the association of GDM and risk of HF. METHODS: This study is a systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched PubMed and Embase through July 24, 2024, for cohort studies reporting on the GDM and HF association. We pooled adjusted relative risk (RR) estimates of the association of GDM and HF using a random-effects model meta-analysis. RESULTS: = 86.9%, P < 0.001). Sensitivity analyses, excluding the smallest and largest studies, did not appreciably change the significance and magnitude of the overall RR estimate of the risk of HF related to GDM. CONCLUSIONS: The observed independent association of GDM with HF suggests a potential causal role of GDM in adverse myocardial remodeling. A history of GDM should be considered as a risk factor in the efforts to prevent HF.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".