ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2025
Association between gestational weight gain and perinatal outcomes among women with gestational diabetes mellitus.
Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of gestational weight gain on adverse pregnancy outcomes in women with gestational diabetes: a retrospective cohort study.BMC pediatrics · 2026Article
- Trimester-specific gestational weight gain and adverse outcomes in GDM women: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Early Postpartum Weight Retention in Women with Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in China: Current Status and Influencing Factors.International journal of women's health · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study identifies the optimal gestational weight gain (GWG) range for women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in singleton pregnancies and examines the relationship between GWG patterns and perinatal outcomes. Methods: We included 18,548 pregnant women diagnosed with GDM via a 75g glucose tolerance test at Fujian Maternal and Child Health Hospital from 2011 to 2022. Data on demographics, GWG, delivery details, and maternal and infant outcomes were collected. Subjects were divided into training and validation sets (7:3 ratio) and classified by pre-pregnancy BMI: underweight, normal weight, overweight, and obese. Logistic regression in the training set was conducted to determine optimal GWG for each group, and examined the relationship between adverse outcomes and the Institute of Medicine(IOM), Chinese nutrition society(CNS), and study-derived (AOR) standards in the validation set. Results: Among participants, 17.0% pregnant women gained insufficient GWG, 49.2% gained appropriate GWG, and 33.9% with excessive GWG. The optimal GWG for underweight, normal weight, overweight, and women with obesity were 12-14 kg, 8-14 kg, 6-10 kg, and 2-4 kg, respectively. Insufficient GWG in IOM and AOR standard increased composite adverse outcomes among underweight women. Normal weight: Insufficient GWG per CNS and AOR increased composite adverse outcomes; excessive GWG per all standards increased adverse outcomes. Insufficient GWG per all standards reduced the risk of small-for-gestational-age (SGA) infants, while excessive GWG increased the risk of large-for-gestational-age (LGA) infants, gestational hypertension, and cesarean section. Overweight: Excessive GWG per CNS and AOR increased composite adverse outcomes; excessive GWG per all standards increased the risk of cesarean delivery. Obese: Insufficient GWG per IOM and CNS increased composite adverse outcomes. Conclusion: GWG significantly influences adverse pregnancy outcomes. Compared to IOM guidelines, CNS recommendations and study-derived GWG ranges are more suitable for Chinese women with GDM in singleton pregnancies.
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.