ArticleAmerican journal of obstetrics and gynecology2015
Evaluating gestational weight gain recommendations in pregestational diabetes.
Article in American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Impact of nutrition counseling on dietary improvements, glycemic control, and neonatal outcomes in pregnant women with pregestational diabetes mellitus: an electronic medical charts analysis study in a tertiary medical center.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Gestational weight gain and pregnancy outcomes in Chinese women with type 2 diabetes mellitus: evidence from a tertiary hospital in Beijing.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Article
- Influence of the DASH Diet on Gestational Weight Gain and Perinatal Outcomes in Women with Pre-Existing Diabetes Mellitus: A Randomized, Single-Blind, Controlled Clinical Trial.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Management of type 2 diabetes in pregnancy: a narrative review.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Review
- Intergenerational Effects of Health Issues Among Women of Childbearing Age: a Review of the Recent Literature.Current nutrition reports · 2018Review
- Pregestational type 2 diabetes mellitus induces cardiac hypertrophy in the murine embryo through cardiac remodeling and fibrosis.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2017Article
- Preventing large birth size in women with preexisting diabetes mellitus: The benefit of appropriate gestational weight gain.Preventive medicine · 2016Article
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 at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe Institute of Medicine (IOM) does not provide recommendations for gestational weight gain (GWG) specific to women with pregestational diabetes. We aimed to assess the impact of GWG outside the IOM recommendations on perinatal outcomes. STUDY
designWe performed a retrospective cohort study of all singletons with pregestational diabetes from 2008 through 2013. Women were classified as GWG within, less than, or greater than IOM recommendations for body mass index per week of pregnancy. Maternal outcomes examined were cesarean delivery, preeclampsia, and percentage of visits with glycemic control (>50% blood sugars at goal). Neonatal outcomes were birthweight, small for gestational age (<10th percentile), large for gestational age (LGA) (>90th percentile), macrosomia (>4000 g), preterm delivery (<37 weeks), and birth injury (shoulder dystocia, fracture, brachial plexus injury, cephalohematoma). Groups were compared using analysis of variance and χ(2) test, as appropriate. Backwards stepwise logistic regression was used to adjust for confounding factors.
resultsOf 340 subjects, 37 (10.9%) were within, 64 (18.8%) less than, and 239 (70.3%) greater than IOM recommendations. The incidence of cesarean delivery, preeclampsia, glycemic control, preterm delivery, and birth injury were not significantly different between GWG groups. The incidence of LGA and macrosomia increased as GWG category increased (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 3.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13-8.39 and AOR, 4.02; 95% CI, 1.16-13.9, respectively) without decreasing the incidence of small for gestational age (AOR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.10-1.19). Increases in the risk in LGA and macrosomia were not explained by differences in glycemic control by GWG groups.
conclusionWomen with pregestational diabetes mellitus should be counseled to gain within the IOM recommendations to avoid LGA and macrosomic newborns.
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.