ArticlePloS one2022
Association between folic acid use during pregnancy and gestational diabetes mellitus: Two population-based Nordic cohort studies.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Folic Acid Supplementation and Risk of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review of the Literature.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Pooled it
- Associations of folic acid supplements and dietary folate intake with gestational diabetes mellitus: complementary evidence from a multimethod investigation.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- The roles of folate, MTHFR genetics, vitamin B12 in pregnancy outcomes.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Review
- Enhanced recovery in patients with gestational diabetes mellitus andFrontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionInconsistent results have been reported on the association between folic acid use in pregnancy and risk of GDM. The aim of this study was to estimate the association between folic acid use and GDM in two population-based Nordic cohorts. MATERIAL AND
methodsTwo cohort studies were conducted using data from the national population registers in Norway (2005-2018, n = 791,709) and Sweden (2006-2016, n = 1,112,817). Logistic regression was used to estimate the associations between GDM and self-reported folic acid use and prescribed folic acid use, compared to non-users, adjusting for covariates. To quantify how potential unmeasured confounders may affect the estimates, E-values were reported. An exposure misclassification bias analysis was also performed.
resultsIn Norwegian and Swedish cohorts, adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for maternal self-reported folic acid use were 1.10 (1.06-1.14) and 0.89 (0.85-0.93), with E-values of 1.43 (1.31) and 1.50 (1.36), respectively. For prescribed folic acid use, ORs were 1.33 (1.15-1.53) and 1.56 (1.41-1.74), with E-values of 1.99 (1.57) and 2.49 (2.17), in Norway and Sweden respectively.
conclusionsThe slightly higher or lower odds for GDM in self-reported users of folic acid in Norway and Sweden respectively, are likely not of clinical relevance and recommendations for folic acid use in pregnancy should remain unchanged. The two Nordic cohorts showed different directions of the association between self-reported folic acid use and GDM, but based on bias analysis, exposure misclassification is an unlikely explanation since there may still be differences in prevalence of use and residual confounding. Prescribed folic acid is used by women with specific comorbidities and co-medications, which likely underlies the higher odds for GDM.
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.