ArticlePregnancy (Hoboken, N.J.)2026
Risk of gestational diabetes by aerobic and resistance exercise during the first and second trimesters.
Article in Pregnancy (Hoboken, N.J.), 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
Objective: While some studies have shown that exercise reduces the incidence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), there is limited evidence on whether aerobic or resistance exercise is more beneficial. This study aimed to examine the rate of GDM according to the type of exercise during early pregnancy. Study design: We analyzed data from the Nulliparous Pregnancy Outcomes Study: Monitoring Mothers-to-Be (nuMoM2b), a prospective cohort of individuals enrolled during the first and second trimesters. We excluded participants with pregestational diabetes or delivery <20 weeks. The primary exposure was either aerobic or resistance exercises in the first or second trimester. For each trimester, the metabolic equivalent of task hours per week (MET-h/week) was calculated for each exercise. Participants were grouped as follows: "Aerobic exercise" (≥7.5 MET-h/week from aerobic exercises), "Resistance exercise" (≥2 times/week from resistance exercises), "Both types of exercise" (≥7.5 MET-h/week from aerobic exercise and ≥2 times/week from resistance exercises), and "Insufficient exercise" (≤7.5 MET-h/week from aerobic exercise and ≤2 times/week from resistance exercises). Our primary outcome was GDM. Adjusted relative risks (aRRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated using modified Poisson regression, adjusting for potential confounders. Results: In both the first and second trimesters, analyses included 9049 individuals. In the first trimester, individuals who performed aerobic exercise (aRR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.60-0.93) had a lower risk of GDM compared with those with insufficient exercise. In the second trimester, those who performed aerobic exercise (aRR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.63-0.97) and both types of exercise (aRR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.25-0.93) had a lower risk of GDM. Resistance exercise alone, compared to insufficient exercise and compared to aerobic exercise alone, was not clearly associated with significant differences in GDM. Across trimesters, we did not observe increased risks of small for gestational age birth, preterm birth, and preeclampsia. Conclusion: Aerobic exercise during the first and second trimesters and combined aerobic/resistance exercise during the second trimester were associated with a lower risk of GDM compared to insufficient exercise. Future intervention studies focusing on exercise to reduce the risk of GDM are warranted.
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.