ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2026
LASSO regression-derived first-trimester (9-14
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEarly identification of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is critical for mitigating adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. Existing prediction models face limitations in clinical utility due to inconsistent variable selection and reliance on impractical biomarkers. This study aimed to develop and validate a resource-efficient GDM prediction model using routinely available first-trimester clinical indicators and deploy it as an open-access web tool.
methodsA retrospective cohort of 1818 pregnancies from a Shanghai tertiary hospital (2023) was randomly divided into training (70%) and validation (30%) sets. Three predictor screening strategies (traditional logistic regression, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression with 1SE rule, and LASSO-MIN rule) were compared. The model performance was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves (AUC), the calibration curve, the clinical decision curve (DCA) and the clinical impact curve (CIC). The optimal model was visualized as a nomogram and deployed as an open access web calculator.
resultsThe LASSO-1SE model achieved the best balance of accuracy and simplicity, with an AUC of 0.717 (95% CI 0.681-0.753), sensitivity 69.7%, specificity 64.9%, and high positive predictive value (PPV = 92.3%).The model showed robust calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow P > 0.3) and clinical utility across risk thresholds in DCA and CIC. A nomogram and an open-access web calculator ( https://wangxiao0922.shinyapps.io/20250309/ ) were developed for risk stratification.
conclusionsThis resource-efficient tool enables early GDM risk stratification using routine clinical variables, supporting timely intervention in diverse healthcare settings.
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.