Observational studyDiabetes care2026
Early Pregnancy Glycemic Testing for Prediction of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus and Large-for-Gestational-Age Birth Weight.
Observational study in Diabetes care, 2026. 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.
- Managing Gestational Diabetes Complexity with Continuous Glucose Monitoring: A Narrative Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveWe evaluated whether early pregnancy oral glucose tolerance testing (OGTT) or continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) improves gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) or large-for-gestational-age (LGA) birth prediction over clinical factors alone. RESEARCH DESIGN AND
methodsIn the Glycemic Observation and Metabolic Outcomes in Mothers and Offspring (GO MOMs) study, a prospective observational study at nine U.S. sites (2021-2025), participants with singleton gestation and without preexisting diabetes underwent blinded 75-g OGTT and CGM at 10-14 weeks' gestation. Predictive models for GDM at 24-28 weeks and LGA were developed using these data and clinical factors (maternal age, BMI, GDM or macrosomia history). New glycemic criteria maximized the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve in training data from four sites and were validated in five. Models incorporating OGTT or CGM criteria versus clinical factors alone compared positive predictive value (PPV) at a prespecified negative predictive value (NPV) at a reported 8.3% national GDM prevalence and 10% for LGA.
resultsOf 2,178 participants, 93.3% who were pregnant at 24-28 weeks completed OGTTs (15.4% GDM), and 98.1% with live births had data to determine LGA (11.2% LGA). At NPV ≥96% and 8.3% GDM prevalence, PPV for GDM was 12.2% (95% CI 11.0-13.3%) for clinical factors alone, 26.5% (23.1-30.3%) for OGTT plus clinical factors, and 19.8% (17.2-22.5%) for CGM plus clinical factors. For LGA, neither glycemic model improved PPV. Validation confirmed findings.
conclusionsIn a U.S.-representative population, adding 10- to 14-week OGTT or CGM criteria to clinical factors improved GDM but not LGA prediction. Future studies should determine whether predicting GDM in the first trimester facilitates interventions that improve GDM-related pregnancy 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.