MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6977497089 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.c.5675982

Associations of overweight and gestational diabetes mellitus with free sugars from solid and liquid sources: cross-sectional and nested case-control analyses

2021· other· en· W6977497089 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2021
Typeother
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVirology and Viral Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOverweightGestational diabetesPercentileOdds ratioBody mass indexPopulationObesityDiabetes mellitus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Sugar-sweetened beverages have obesogenic and diabetogenic effects ascribed to free sugars. These include added sugars and naturally occurring sugars in juices. A meta-analysis indicates that some foods with added sugars are associated with lower type 2 diabetes rates. To expand the evidence relevant to free sugars from solid sources, we examined a young to middle-aged population with respect to overweight and gestational diabetes (GDM) outcomes. Methods We studied female participants (12–50 years old) from the 2004–2005 Canadian Community Health Survey 2.2 (CCHS) with data linked to the hospital Discharge Abstract Database (DAD) until 2017, providing 13 years of follow-up. We estimated free sugars by solid and liquid sources from 24-h dietary recalls as percent total energy intake (TE%), and computed body mass index (BMI). We applied ICD-10 diagnostic codes for deliveries and GDM to DAD. We conducted multivariable logistic regression analyses to evaluate associations between free sugars with overweight at baseline (cross-sectional component) and, in those who delivered, with GDM during follow-up (nested case control component). We compared those with consumption above versus below various thresholds of intake for free sugars, considering solid and liquid sources separately (2.TE%, 5TE%, 10TE% and 15TE% thresholds). Results Among 6305 participants, 2505 (40%) were overweight, defined as BMI ≥ 85th percentile below 18 years and BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2 for adults. Free sugars from solid sources were associated with lower odds of overweight above versus below the 2.5TE% (adjusted odds ratio [adjOR] 0.80, 95%CI 0.70–0.92), 5TE% (adjOR 0.89, 95%CI 0.79–0.99), and 10TE% (adjOR 0.86, 95%CI 0.75–0.97) thresholds. Free sugars from liquid sources were associated with greater odds of overweight across the 2.5TE% (adjOR 1.20, 95%CI 1.07–1.36), 10TE% (adjOR 1.17, 95%CI 1.02–1.34), and 15TE% (adjOR 1.43, 95%CI 1.23–1.67) thresholds. There were 113 cases of GDM among the 1842 women who delivered (6.1%). Free sugars from solid sources were associated with lower odds of GDM above versus below the 5TE% threshold (adjOR 0.56, 95%CI 0.36–0.85). Conclusions Our findings support limiting free sugars from liquid sources, given associations with overweight. We did not identify adverse associations of free sugars from solid sources across any of the thresholds examined.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicVirology and Viral DiseasesFrench-language works237,207