ArticleJournal of translational medicine2026
Early prediction of gestational diabetes mellitus with clinical characteristics, cell-free DNA and genetic variants.
Article in Journal of translational medicine, 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
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) remains a prevalent and heterogeneous pregnancy complication with limited strategies for early identification. We aimed to investigate efficient approaches for early prediction of GDM with clinical and genetic risk factors.
methodsA previously developed machine-learning model based on clinical characteristics achieved an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.77. To improve predictive accuracy, we further collected non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) results from 595 pregnant women (295 with GDM, 300 without). A cumulative polygenic risk score (PRS) was calculated using 1,170 selected single nucleotide variants (SNVs). Logistic regression, support vector machines, random forest, decision tree, linear model and naïve Bayes machine learning models were employed. External validation was performed with an additional 2,350 blood samples independently collected from two other centers.
resultsLogistic regression analysis showed that the PRS alone achieved an AUC of 0.75 for GDM discrimination. From cell-free DNA (cfDNA) sequencing performed during NIPT, we identified 357 gene transcripts with differential coverage at transcription start sites. A cfDNA-based linear model achieved an AUC of 0.83 using a subset of 166 signature genes, which reached 0.85 when combined with clinical features. Integration of clinical features, cfDNA, and SNVs yielded the highest performance using a random forest model (AUC = 0.89, specificity = 0.74, sensitivity = 0.89). For external validation, a clinically practical model incorporating clinical features and cfDNA achieved an AUC of 0.83 using linear approach.
conclusionsOur GDM prediction model has reached high accuracy fully using accessible clinical and genetic data routinely generated from current antenatal testing, enabling early screening and interventions for women at risk.
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.