Evidence mapPaperPMID 38524205Full record

ArticleF&S reports2024

Gestational diabetes mellitus in pregnancies conceived after infertility treatment: a population-based study in the United States, 2015-2020.

Devika Sachdev, Mark V Sauer, Cande V Ananth

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in F&S reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Devika SachdevDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, New Jersey.
Mark V SauerDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, New Jersey.
Cande V AnanthDepartment of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, New Jersey.
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the risk of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in singleton pregnancies conceived using infertility treatment and examine the influence of race and ethnicity as well as prepregnancy body mass index (BMI). Design: Cross-sectional study using the US vital records data of women that delivered singleton births. Setting: United States, 2015-2020. Interventions: Any infertility treatment was divided into two groups: those that used fertility-enhancing drugs, artificial insemination, or intrauterine insemination, and those that used assisted reproductive technology (ART). Main Outcome Measuress: Gestational diabetes mellitus, defined as a diagnosis of diabetes mellitus during pregnancy, includes both diet-controlled GDM and medication-controlled GDM in singleton pregnancies conceived with infertility treatment or spontaneously and delivered between 20- and 44-weeks' gestation. We also examined whether the infertility treatment-GDM association was modified by maternal race and ethnicity as well as prepregnancy BMI. Associations were expressed as a rate ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI), derived from log-linear models after adjustment for potential confounders. Results: A total of 21,943,384 singleton births were included, with 1.5% (n = 318,086) undergoing infertility treatment. Rates of GDM among women undergoing infertility treatment and those who conceived spontaneously were 11.0% (n = 34,946) and 6.5% (n = 1,398,613), respectively (adjusted RR 1.24, 95% CI 1.23, 1.26). The RRs were adjusted for maternal age, parity, education, race and ethnicity, smoking, BMI, chronic hypertension, and year of delivery. The risk of GDM was modestly increased for those using fertility-enhancing drugs (adjusted RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.27, 1.30) compared with ART (adjusted RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.17, 1.20), and this risk was especially apparent for non-Hispanic White women (adjusted RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.26, 1.31) and Hispanic women (adjusted RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.29, 1.41). The number of women who needed to be exposed to infertility treatment to diagnose one case of GDM was 46. Prepregnancy BMI did not modify the infertility treatment-GDM association overall and within strata of race and ethnicity. These general patterns were stronger after potential corrections for misclassification of infertility treatment and unmeasured confounding. Conclusions: Infertility treatment, among those who received fertility-enhancing drugs, is associated with an increased GDM risk. The persistently higher risk of GDM among women who seek infertility treatment, irrespective of prepregnancy weight classification, deserves attention. Infertility specialists must be vigilant with preconception counseling and ensure that all patients, regardless of race and ethnicity or BMI, are adequately tested for GDM early in pregnancy using a fasting blood glucose level or a traditional 50-g oral glucose tolerance test. Testing may be completed by the infertility specialist or deferred to the primary prenatal care provider at the first prenatal visit.

Indexed as

assisted reproductive technologyBMIfertility-enhancing drugsgestational diabetes mellitusInfertility

Identifiers

PMID38524205
PMCPMC10958713
OpenAlexW4388776371

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.