MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413444656 · doi:10.1016/j.cdnut.2025.107531

Association between Early Pregnancy Maternal Folate and Glycemic Indices at Oral Glucose Tolerance Test: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4413444656 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nishanthi Periyathambi, Swetha Sampathkumar, Nithya Sukumar, Yonas Ghebremichael‐Weldeselassie, Ponnusamy Saravanan

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Developments in Nutrition · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFolate and B Vitamins Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilNovo NordiskUniversity of Warwick
KeywordsMeta-analysisMedicinePregnancyObstetricsTest (biology)Association (psychology)Internal medicineBiologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Folate plays a crucial role in fetal development, but its relationship with maternal glucose metabolism remains inconclusive. Recent meta-analyses have suggested a correlation between high folate and risk of gestational diabetes mellitus in pregnancy; however, its association with different glycemic parameters has not yet been explored. Objectives: This study aims to comprehensively synthesize evidence and test the association between early pregnancy circulating folate (<16 wk of gestation) and glycemic indices measured during oral glucose tolerance testing (OGTT) at 24-28 wk. Methods: We conducted a systematic search of databases up to 25 June, 2025, examining the relationship between early pregnancy folate and maternal glycemic indices. Study quality was assessed by Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Standardized effect sizes (std. β coefficients) for serum/plasma folate were pooled using a random-effects model. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed to account for between-study heterogeneity. Results: >70%). Conclusions: Our analysis suggests a possible association between higher early pregnancy folate levels and higher glucose levels at the time of OGTT. However, these findings should be interpreted cautiously, given the methodological limitations and the limited number of studies included in this review.This trial was registered at PROSPERO as CRD42021255022.

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)0.024
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: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.030
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.308 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Developments in NutritionSame topicFolate and B Vitamins ResearchFrench-language works237,207