ArticlePatient preference and adherence2025
Blood Glucose Management Protection Motivation Trajectory and Its Associated Factors in Pregnant Women with Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Longitudinal Study.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Machine learning versus traditional regression models for predicting diabetic retinopathy screening adherence among community-dwelling older adults with diabetes.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Health Behavior Protection Motivation and eHealth Literacy in Type 2 Diabetes Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To (1) explore the trajectories of blood glucose management protection motivation in pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus, based on a growth mixture model, and (2) identify factors associated with these trajectories. Patients and Methods: This longitudinal study, conducted between December 2023 and June 2024 at a tertiary hospital in China, involved 313 pregnant women diagnosed with gestational diabetes mellitus who were not using medication to control their blood glucose levels. Participants were assessed at three time points: 24-28 gestational weeks, 29-35 gestational weeks, and 36-40 gestational weeks. The data collected included general demographic information and the level of blood glucose management protection motivation. A growth mixture model was employed to examine the trajectory of blood glucose management protection motivation, and binary logistic regression analysis was performed to identify predictors of the trajectory. This study was reported following the Reporting Observational Longitudinal Research statement. Results: The study identified two distinct trajectories of blood glucose management protection motivation: a low-motivation group (slowly increasing then rapidly declining; 124, 39.62%) and a high-motivation group (rapidly then increasing slowly declining; 189, 60.38%). The independent predictors of these trajectory categories included age, per capita monthly household income, and pregnancy complications. Conclusion: Significant heterogeneity existed in the developmental trajectories of blood glucose management protection motivation among pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus. Future research should prioritize developing targeted interventions that consider not only different developmental trajectories but also factors such as age, per capita monthly household income, and pregnancy complications. These strategies may foster blood glucose management protection motivation among pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus, addressing their specific needs and enhancing the effectiveness of care.
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.