Gestational reactive hypoglycaemia and adverse pregnancy outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Reactive hypoglycaemia is a condition where blood glucose drops after a glucose load, and may be associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes. This study aimed to determine the association between gestational reactive hypoglycaemia (GRH) and the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes including those related to diabetes. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis by searching 4 databases: Medline, Embase, Web of science, and Maternity & infant care database, from inception to 1 December 2023. The outcomes of interest were any reported adverse pregnancy outcomes including large for gestational age (LGA), macrosomia, small for gestational age (SGA), fetal growth restriction (FGR), low birth weight (LBW), caesarean delivery, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission, neonatal hypoglycaemia, polyhydramnios, 5-min APGAR score < 7 and preterm delivery. Risk of bias assessment was performed with Newcastle Ottawa scale. Subgroup analysis was also performed. RESULTS: From 14,746 records, 42 studies were selected for full-text assessment. Thirty studies reporting on 114,148 participants, including 18,878 women with GRH, fulfilled eligibility criteria. Pregnancies with observed GRH had higher risk of SGA (RR = 1.49, 95%CI = 1.33, 1.68), LBW (RR = 1.35, 95%CI = 1.13, 1.60), FGR (RR = 1.21, 95%CI = 1.05, 1.41), and NICU admission (RR = 1.23, 95%CI = 1.02, 1.49) compared to the euglycaemic group. At subgroup analyses, GRH diagnosed at postload glucose < 3 mmol/l was associated with an increased risk of NICU admission (RR = 3.39, 95%CI = 1.56, 7.34); and GRH limited to post glucose tolerance test (GTT) was associated with increased risk of polyhydramnios (RR = 1.93, 95%CI = 1.17, 3.20) and SGA (RR = 1.90, 95%CI = 1.01, 3.58). CONCLUSIONS: GRH is a condition not routinely diagnosed in pregnancy but associated with adverse fetal-neonatal outcomes as SGA, FGR, and NICU admission. At GTT, GRH is associated with the risk of polyhydramnios. More studies are still necessary to determine the threshold value for diagnosis of GRH and explore associations with other outcomes related to glucose dysmetabolism.
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 | 0.012 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.038 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".