Translating Healthy Living Messages to Postpartum Women and Their Partners After Gestational Diabetes (GDM): Body Habitus, A1C, Lifestyle Habits, and Program Engagement Results From the Families Defeating Diabetes (FDD) Randomized Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose:The Families Defeating Diabetes intervention evaluated a postpartum healthy living program for women with recent gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM).Design:Randomized controlled trial.Setting:Tertiary centers in London, Calgary, and Victoria, Canada.Participants:Women with GDM and partners; 46% of eligible maternal participants agreed to participate.Intervention:Interventional (INT) participants received a healthy living seminar at 3 months; access to a walking group/Website; biweekly e-mails. Control (CON) participants received a contemporary postpartum diabetes prevention handout.Measures:Maternal, partner, and offspring demographics at baseline, 3, and 12 months.Analysis:Percentages of women losing ≥7% of postpartum weight were compared by χ2 testing; body habitus comparisons by analysis of covariance (ANCOVA); maternal A1C comparisons by unpaired t tests; participant outcome associations by Pearson correlation coefficients.Results:Maternal participants were 170 (89 INT and 81 CON) with 63 partners (30 INT and 33 CON); 103 (73 maternal; 30 partners) were lost to follow-up; 57% of maternal participants completed 12 months; 33% INT women (n = 50) lost ≥7% weight versus 25% CON women (n = 47), P = .43. Interventional participant results did not correlate with accession of study elements. Maternal completion was significantly associated with partner involvement, breastfeeding, higher income, and education. Paternal weights correlated significantly with maternal and offspring weights.Conclusion:Families Defeating Diabetes outcomes were not significantly different for INT maternal or paternal participants versus CON participants. Secondary outcomes of future value included statistically significant positive associations between paternal participation, socioeconomic indicators, and maternal study completion, significant correlations between maternal, paternal, and offspring weights as well as insights into study component engagement.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".