ArticleMaternal & child nutrition2025
Trends of Large for Gestational Age and Macrosomia and Their Mediating Effect on the Association Between Diabetes Mellitus and Obstetric Hemorrhage.
Article in Maternal & child nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to determine the prevalence of large for gestational age (LGA) and macrosomia in China from 2012 to 2021 and explore if LGA and macrosomia mediate the relationship between diabetes mellitus in pregnancy (DIP) and obstetric haemorrhage. The overall annual change rate (ACR) was calculated, and stratification analysis was performed. Mediation analysis assessed the influence of LGA and macrosomia in the association between DIP and obstetric haemorrhage. The nationwide prevalence of LGA and macrosomia was 15.8% and 6.8%, respectively. The ACR for LGA was 0.71% (95% CI, 0.66%-0.76%); pre-2016, -0.44% (95% CI, -0.63% to -0.25%); post-2016, -0.29% (95% CI, -0.39% to -0.19%). The ACR for macrosomia was -1.17% (95% CI, -1.24% to -1.09%); pre-2016, -0.73% (95% CI, -1.03% to -0.43%); post-2016, -2.42% (95% CI, -2.59% to -2.26%). In western and rural area, the ACR for LGA was 1.94% (95% CI, 1.84%-2.05%) and 1.81% (95% CI, 1.73%-1.89%), and LGA was increasing among these women in the post-2016 period. About 7.0% of pregnant women had DIP, and the LGA and macrosomia prevalences among women with DIP were 23.7% and 10.0%, respectively. In the mediation analysis, the total excess risk associated with DIP on obstetric haemorrhage was approximately 0.21 and the proportion mediated by LGA and macrosomia was 12.10% and 11.81%, respectively. In rural areas, the proportion mediated by LGA and macrosomia was amplified to 18.34% and 16.40%. Macrosomia rates declined steadily, but LGA rates increased slightly in disadvantaged areas. LGA and macrosomia mediated the association between DIP and obstetric haemorrhage, and the mediating effect intensified in rural regions. Addressing LGA warrants management for at-risk fetuses.
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.