Gestational diabetes as a risk factor for GBS maternal rectovaginal colonization: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Maternal rectovaginal colonization by group B Streptococcus (GBS) increases the risk of perinatal GBS disease that can lead to death or long-term neurological impairment. Factors that increase the risk of rectovaginal GBS carriage are incompletely understood resulting in missed opportunities for detecting GBS in risk-based clinical approaches. There is a lacking consensus on whether gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is a risk factor for rectovaginal GBS. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to address current conflicting findings and determine whether GDM should be clinically considered as a risk factor for maternal GBS colonization. Methods Peer-reviewed studies that provided GDM prevalence and documented GBS vaginal and/or rectal colonization in women with and without GDM were included in this analysis. From study inception to October 30, 2023, we identified 6,275 relevant studies from EMBASE and PUBMED of which 19 were eligible for inclusion. Eligible studies were analyzed and thoroughly assessed for risk of bias with a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale that interrogated representativeness and comparability of cohorts, quality of reporting for GDM and GBS status, and potential bias from other metabolic diseases. Results were synthesized using STATA 18 and analyzed using random-effects meta-analyses. Results Studies encompassed 266,706 women from 10 different countries, with study periods spanning from 1981 to 2020. Meta-analysis revealed that gestational diabetes is associated with a 16% increased risk of rectovaginal GBS carriage (OR 1.16, CI 1.07–1.26, P = 0.003). We also performed subgroup analyses to assess independent effects of pregestational vs. gestational diabetes on risk of maternal GBS carriage. Pregestational diabetes (Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes mellitus) was also associated with an increased risk of 76% (pooled OR 1.76, CI 1.27–2.45, P = 0.0008). Conclusions This study achieved a consensus among previously discrepant observations and demonstrated that gestational diabetes and pregestational diabetes are significant risk factors for maternal rectovaginal carriage of GBS. Recognition of GDM as a risk factor during clinical decisions about GBS screening and intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis may decrease the global burden of GBS on maternal-perinatal health.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.549 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".