Participant characteristics in the prevention of gestational diabetes as evidence for precision medicine: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Precision prevention involves using the unique characteristics of a particular group to determine their responses to preventive interventions. This study aimed to systematically evaluate the participant characteristics associated with responses to interventions in gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) prevention.We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Pubmed to identify lifestyle (diet, physical activity, or both), metformin, myoinositol/inositol and probiotics interventions of GDM prevention published up to May 24, 2022.From 10347 studies, 116 studies (n = 40940 women) are included. Physical activity results in greater GDM reduction in participants with a normal body mass index (BMI) at baseline compared to obese BMI (risk ratio, 95% confidence interval: 0.06 [0.03, 0.14] vs 0.68 [0.26, 1.60]). Combined diet and physical activity interventions result in greater GDM reduction in participants without polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) than those with PCOS (0.62 [0.47, 0.82] vs 1.12 [0.78-1.61]) and in those without a history of GDM than those with unspecified GDM history (0.62 [0.47, 0.81] vs 0.85 [0.76, 0.95]). Metformin interventions are more effective in participants with PCOS than those with unspecified status (0.38 [0.19, 0.74] vs 0.59 [0.25, 1.43]), or when commenced preconception than during pregnancy (0.21 [0.11, 0.40] vs 1.15 [0.86-1.55]). Parity, history of having a large-for-gestational-age infant or family history of diabetes have no effect on intervention responses.GDM prevention through metformin or lifestyle differs according to some individual characteristics. Future research should include trials commencing preconception and provide results disaggregated by a priori defined participant characteristics including social and environmental factors, clinical traits, and other novel risk factors to predict GDM prevention through interventions.An individual's characteristics, such as medical, biochemical, social, and behavioural may affect their response to interventions aimed at preventing gestational diabetes, which occurs during pregnancy. Here, we evaluated the published literature on interventions such as diet, lifestyle, drug treatment and nutritional supplement and looked at which individual participant characteristics were associated with response to these interventions. Certain participant characteristics were associated with greater prevention of gestational diabetes through particular treatments. Some interventions were more effective when started prior to conception. Future studies should consider individual characteristics when assessing the effects of preventative measures.
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 | 0.025 | 0.057 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.026 | 0.044 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".