ArticleObesity pillars2025
The relationship between timing of screening for gestational diabetes mellitus and maternal and fetal outcomes: A retrospective cohort study linking primary care electronic and hospital administrative data.
Article in Obesity pillars, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Gestational diabetes (GDM) is associated with adverse outcomes including a large-for-gestational age (LGA) baby, which in turn is associated with downstream childhood obesity. Appropriate timing of GDM screening is important for prompt initiation and optimization of medical management, potentially mitigating the risk of those outcomes. The present study explored the association between the timing of GDM screening and macrosomia, LGA, shoulder dystocia and caesarean section. Methods: This retrospective cohort study linked primary care prenatal data and intrapartum data from a provincial hospital administrative database. Women with singleton pregnancies who received prenatal care between July 1, 2019 and December 31, 2022 and who also delivered within that timeframe were included in the study. Results: 198 participants were linked between the databases. Among participants for whom GDM risk could be calculated (n = 180), 30.6 % had late GDM screening. Unadjusted logistic regression models showed that late screening for GDM was associated with higher likelihood of LGA (OR = 2.89; 95 % CI = 1.19-7.04; p = 00.019). Adjusted models showed that the best predictor of macrosomia, LGA, and shoulder dystocia was excess gestational weight gain (GWG) (OR = 3.26, CI = 1.17-9.10, p = 0.024; OR 3.00, 95 % CI 0.91-9.93, p = 00.072; and OR = 3.52, CI = 0.83-14.84, p = 00.087 respectively); the best predictor of caesarean section was pre-pregnancy BMI (OR = 2.86; CI = 1.12 = 7.27; p = 0.028). Conclusions: Almost one-third of participants had screening later than recommended, and late screening for GDM was associated with a higher likelihood of LGA. Linking longitudinal prenatal primary care data to hospital administrative data creates opportunities for future studies pertaining to prenatal care, potentially resulting in improvements in the care provided to vulnerable populations experiencing disproportionate rates of pre-pregnancy obesity and excess GWG.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.