ArticlePaediatric and perinatal epidemiology2014
Population health: modest glycaemic improvements in a pregnant cohort with mild glucose intolerance decreased adverse outcomes.
Article in Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology, 2014. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association of Overnight Fasting Duration and Meal Frequency with Glucose and Lipid Metabolism During Pregnancy: A Cross-Sectional Study.Nutrients · 2025Article
- Associations between night eating syndrome and metabolic parameters in pregnant women.Turkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2019Article
- Maternal Circadian Eating Time and Frequency Are Associated with Blood Glucose Concentrations during Pregnancy.The Journal of nutrition · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAdverse perinatal outcomes are common with pregnancy-related mild glucose intolerance. The perinatal impact of improving this population's health, instead of individual health, has not been quantified.
methodsWe estimated this impact among women with mild glucose intolerance, delivered at The University of North Carolina Women's Hospital from April 1996 to May 2010. We compared observed with predicted risks of perinatal outcomes after simulating a cohort with a one standard deviation decrease in each glucose value. We estimated absolute and adjusted risks, relative risks, and risk differences with Poisson regression and bootstrapped 95% confidence intervals [CI].
resultsAmong 3217 women, mean (SD) 1-h screening result was 157 (16) mg/dL; 3-h diagnostic results were 81 (10), 154 (28), 130 (25), and 104 (26) mg/dL for fasting, 1-h, 2-h, and 3-h, respectively. Compared with observed, predicted risks decreased for preeclampsia (9.1% vs. 6.6%, risk ratio [RR] 0.73 [95% CI 0.60, 0.88]), caesarean delivery (30.1% vs. 26.4%, RR 0.88 [95% CI 0.81, 0.96]), preterm birth (13.0% vs. 9.8%, RR 0.75 [95% CI 0.64, 0.87]), birthweight >4000 g (13.4% vs. 10.5%, RR 0.78 [95% CI 0.67, 0.90]), and shoulder dystocia (3.5% vs. 2.2%, RR 0.61 [95% CI 0.46, 0.83]).
conclusionsModestly improved population distribution of glucose tolerance in pregnancies affected by mild glucose intolerance translated to meaningful improvements in perinatal outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.