The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 49 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 13 of the 30 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity
Open accessAbstract
HAPO follow-up study examining associations of gestational diabetes with maternal glucose disorders and childhood adiposity 10 to 14 years postpartum.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
37 Own result · 31 Own method · 9 Own interpretation · 7 Couldn’t confirm · 5 No full text of the sources · 4 Sources not found · 2 Supported so far · 1 Partly supported · 1 Not checked yet · 1 No basis given · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“Adjusting for maternal BMI attenuated the associations between gestational diabetes and childhood obesity in earlier studies, 30,31”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [30] 30. Freinkel N. Banting lecture 1980: of pregnancy and progeny. Diabetes. 1980;29(12):1023-1035. doi:10.2337/diab.29.12.1023 source
- Could not verifycites [31] 31. Scholtens DM, Bain JR, Reisetter AC, et al; HAPO Study Cooperative Research Group. Metabolic Networks and Metabolites Underlie Associations Between Maternal Glucose During Pregnancy and Newborn Size at Birth. Diabetes. 2016;65(7):2039-2050. doi:10.2337/db15-1748 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction says offspring of mothers with gestational diabetes are at risk for childhood obesity, but it does not say whether adjusting for maternal BMI attenuates that association. The Methods describe BMI adjustment for analyses of newborn birth weight and skinfolds, not childhood obesity. Searches for BMI adjustment and attenuation found no passage addressing the claimed finding. (LLM, conf=0.76)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“A meta-analysis of 20 studies that were performed prior to the development of the IADPSG criteria and that used varied criteria to diagnose gestational diabetes demonstrated that women with a history of gestational diabetes had a higher risk of developing type 2 diabetes compared with women with a normoglycemic pregnancy (relative risk, 7.43).23”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Discussion
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [23] 23. Bao W, Yeung E, Tobias DK, et al. Long-term risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus in relation to BMI and weight change among women with a history of gestational diabetes mellitus: a prospective cohort study. Diabetologia. 2015;58(6):1212-1219. doi:10 .1007/s00125-015-3537-4 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“Higher maternal BMI is associated with higher childhood adiposity through shared genetics, familial lifestyle and environmental factors, and the intrauterine environment.29”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Discussion
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [29] 29. HAPO Study Cooperative Research Group. Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome (HAPO) Study: associations with neonatal anthropometrics. Diabetes. 2009;58(2):453-459. doi:10.2337/db08-1112 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion reports an association between maternal glucose and neonatal adiposity, with maternal BMI treated as a potential confounder. It says that whether maternal metabolic conditions have long-term effects remains to be investigated. Our copy does not establish an association between maternal BMI and childhood adiposity or identify shared genetics and familial lifestyle as pathways; searches for those terms found no such passage. (LLM, conf=0.75)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Could not verify
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“However, recent metabolomics studies performed within the HAPO Study and within other cohorts support the concept that mixed nutrients (eg, sugars, lipids, and amino acids) contribute to associations of maternal hyperglycemia with newborn outcomes.34,35”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [34] 34. Catalano PM, Farrell K, Thomas A, et al. Perinatal risk factors for childhood obesity and metabolic dysregulation. Am J Clin Nutr. 2009;90 (5):1303-1313. doi:10.3945/ajcn.2008.27416 source
- Could not verifycites [35] 35. Kim SY, England JL, Sharma JA, Njoroge T. Gestational diabetes mellitus and risk of childhood overweight and obesity in offspring: a systematic review. Exp Diabetes Res. 2011;2011:541308. doi:10.1155/2011/541308 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 5 discusses fetal exposure to maternal hyperglycemia, and Section 6.1 discusses a HAPO follow-up on childhood BMI. Neither passage addresses metabolomics studies or whether sugars, lipids, and amino acids jointly contribute to associations with newborn outcomes. Searches for those terms and for mixed nutrients found no supporting passage in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Among mothers with GD, 52.2% (346/663) developed a disorder of glucose metabolism vs 20.1% (791/3946) of mothers without GD”
- Also stated in: § Gestational Diabetes Status and Maternal Outcomes Primary Outcome · plain
“Overall, 52.2% (346/663) of mothers with gestational diabetes developed a disorder of glucose metabolism compared with 20.1% (791/3946) of mothers without gestational diabetes.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Gestational Diabetes Status and Maternal Outcomes Primary Outcome · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Among children of mothers with GD vs those without it, the difference in childhood overweight or obesity defined by body mass index cutoffs was not statistically significant”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Among children of mothers with GD, 39.5% (269/681) were overweight or obese and 19.1% (130/681) were obese vs 28.6% (1172/4094) and 9.9% (405/4094), respectively, for children of mothers without GD.”
- Also stated in: § Secondary Outcomes · plain
“Among children whose mothers had gestational diabetes, 19.1% (130/681) were obese compared with 9.9% (405/4094) of children whose mothers did not have gestational diabetes.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Secondary Outcomes · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“however, the offspring of mothers with gestational diabetes were heavier than the offspring of mothers without gestational diabetes.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Participants
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Among children of mothers with GD, 39.5% (269/681) were overweight or obese and 19.1% (130/681) were obese vs 28.6% (1172/4094) and 9.9% (405/4094), respectively, for children of mothers without GD.”
- Also stated in: § Gestational Diabetes Status and Outcomes for Children · plain
“Among children whose mothers had gestational diabetes, 39.5% (269/681) were overweight or obese compared with 28.6% (1172/4094) of children whose mothers did not have gestational diabetes (Table 3).”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Gestational Diabetes Status and Outcomes for Children · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, for the 4452 mothers of child participants who self-reported prepregnancy BMI during the HAPO Study, the correlation between prepregnancy BMI and BMI during the HAPO Study was 0.92.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Limitations
plaincorrelationaln = 4,452- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 41
- It may state two separate claims as one. 45
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Multiple imputation under a missing at random assumption 18,19 using the Mice R package 20 was used in the analyses to model the outcomes for children to account for missing data for Tanner stage”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Multiple Imputation and Exploratory Analyses
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [18] 18. Van Buuren S, Groothuis-Oudshoorn K. mice: multivariate imputation by chained equations in R. J Stat Softw. 2011;45(3):1-67. doi:10.18637/jss .v045.i03 source
Citation 20 identifies the Mice R package used in the citing authors’ analysis. The Abstract (p. 1) identifies mice as an R package for imputing incomplete data by chained equations. The children, Tanner-stage data, and missing-at-random assumption describe the citing study or are attached to other citations, not claims attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.94)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [19] 19. Lawrence JM, Contreras R, Chen W, Sacks DA. Trends in the prevalence of preexisting diabetes and gestational diabetes mellitus among a racially/ethnically diverse population of pregnant women, 1999-2005. Diabetes Care. 2008;31(5): 899-904. doi:10.2337/dc07-2345 source
- Could not verifycites [20] 20. Sacks DA, Hadden DR, Maresh M, et al; HAPO Study Cooperative Research Group. Frequency of gestational diabetes mellitus at collaborating centers based on IADPSG consensus panel-recommended criteria: the Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome (HAPO) Study. Diabetes Care. 2012;35(3):526-528. doi:10.2337 /dc11-1641 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Statistical analyses section (p. 1) describes logistic regression and direct standardization in Stata 11.2. Searches for multiple imputation, missing at random, Mice, and Tanner stage found no passage in this paper addressing the claimed handling of missing child-outcome data. (LLM, conf=0.76)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Missing data for Tanner stage are missing at random.
- Supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“Approximately twice as many women are diagnosed with gestational diabetes using the IADPSG criteria compared with the Carpenter-Coustan criteria.6”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Abstract
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [6] 6. Regnell SE, Lernmark Å. Early prediction of autoimmune (type 1) diabetes. Diabetologia. 2017; 60(8):1370-1381. doi:10.1007/s00125-017-4308-1 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Stage 2 section discusses glucose testing during progression to type 1 diabetes, not gestational-diabetes diagnosis. Searches for IADPSG, Carpenter–Coustan, and gestational-diabetes criteria found no passage comparing the number of women diagnosed under those criteria; the claim cannot be verified from this copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Could not verify
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Based on the HAPO Study and other studies, new criteria for the diagnosis of gestational diabetes were proposed by the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) 2 and adopted by the World Health Organization and others.3,4”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Abstract
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [2] 2. Metzger BE, Gabbe SG, Persson B, et al; International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups Consensus Panel. International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups recommendations on the diagnosis and classification of hyperglycemia in pregnancy. Diabetes Care. 2010;33(3):676-682. doi:10.2337/dc09-1848 source
The 'Translation of HAPO Study Results for Diagnosis of GDM' section says HAPO data formed the basis for the new diagnostic thresholds recommended by the IADPSG panel, with other studies also considered. In the citing sentence, this source is citation 2 for the proposed criteria; the WHO adoption statement is assigned to citations 3 and 4, not this source. (LLM, conf=0.93)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [3] 3. World Health Organization. Diagnostic criteria and classification of hyperglycaemia first detected in pregnancy: a World Health Organization Guideline. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2014;103(3):341- 363. doi:10.1016/j.diabres.2013.10.012 source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [4] 4. Committee on Practice Bulletins-Obstetrics. Practice Bulletin No. 180: gestational diabetes mellitus. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;130(1):e17-e37. doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000002159 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“Estimating that 25% of children of mothers without gestational diabetes would be overweight or obese, a sample size of 5632 was required to detect an odds ratio (OR) of 1.30 with 90% power for a 2-sided type I error rate of 5%.[10][11][12]”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Statistical Analyses
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [10] 10. Hillier TA, Pedula KL, Schmidt MM, Mullen JA, Charles MA, Pettitt DJ. Childhood obesity and metabolic imprinting: the ongoing effects of maternal hyperglycemia. Diabetes Care. 2007;30 (9):2287-2292. doi:10.2337/dc06-2361 source
- Could not verifycites [11] 11. Lawlor DA, Fraser A, Lindsay RS, et al. Association of existing diabetes, gestational diabetes and glycosuria in pregnancy with macrosomia and offspring body mass index, waist and fat mass in later childhood: findings from a prospective pregnancy cohort. Diabetologia. 2010; 53(1):89-97. doi:10.1007/s00125-009-1560-z sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results (pp. 4–5) report cohort sizes and associations with offspring overweight or obesity, but do not give the claimed sample-size calculation. Searches for 5,632, 90% power, an odds ratio of 1.30, and the assumed 25% prevalence found no passage addressing those inputs. (LLM, conf=0.76)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [12] 12. Hsieh FY, Bloch DA, Larsen MD. A simple method of sample size calculation for linear and logistic regression. Stat Med. 1998;17(14):1623-1634. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19980730)17: 14<1623::AID-SIM871>3.0.CO;2-S 14. Carr DB, Newton KM, Utzschneider KM, et al. Modestly elevated glucose levels during pregnancy are associated with a higher risk of future diabetes among women without gestational diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care. 2008;31(5):1037-1039. doi:10.2337/dc07-1957 source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“The risk factors for progression to type 2 diabetes include maternal age, prepartum and postpartum BMI, family history of type 2 diabetes, receipt of insulin for gestational diabetes, and fasting glucose level during pregnancy.6,[24][25][26]”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Discussion
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [6] 6. Regnell SE, Lernmark Å. Early prediction of autoimmune (type 1) diabetes. Diabetologia. 2017; 60(8):1370-1381. doi:10.1007/s00125-017-4308-1 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Environmental factors and Stage 2 sections discuss progression to type 1 diabetes, not progression from gestational diabetes to type 2 diabetes. Searches for maternal age, prepartum and postpartum BMI, gestational diabetes, and fasting glucose did not find a passage addressing the claimed risk factors. (LLM, conf=0.76)
- Could not verifycites [24] 24. Dabelea D, Crume T. Maternal environment and the transgenerational cycle of obesity and diabetes. Diabetes. 2011;60(7):1849-1855. doi:10.2337 /db11-0400 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The “Glucose abnormalities and type 2 diabetes” section discusses diabetes risk in offspring exposed to maternal diabetes, not progression to type 2 diabetes in women after gestational diabetes. The “What is the role of maternal fuels?” section links fasting glucose during pregnancy to infant size, not maternal diabetes progression. Searches for postpartum BMI and maternal progression did not find the claimed list of risk factors in our copy; no page numbers were available. (LLM, conf=0.75)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [25] 25. Buchanan TA, Xiang AH. Gestational diabetes mellitus. J Clin Invest. 2005;115(3):485-491. doi:10 .1172/JCI200524531 source
- Could not verifycites [26] 26. Lakshman R, Elks CE, Ong KK. Childhood obesity. Circulation. 2012;126(14):1770-1779. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.111.047738 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The 'Birth weight and antenatal factors' section discusses maternal obesity and pregnancy glycaemia as associated with offspring outcomes, not a mother's progression to type 2 diabetes. A search for postpartum diabetes after gestational diabetes and the listed risk factors found no passage addressing that progression. (LLM, conf=0.76)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Could not verify
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“In the United States, prevalence of gestational diabetes was 7.4% using the Carpenter-Coustan criteria during a period similar to the HAPO Study.21”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Discussion
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [21] 21. Bellamy L, Casas JP, Hingorani AD, Williams D. Type 2 diabetes mellitus after gestational diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2009;373(9677):1773-1779. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736 (09)60731-5 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The indexed copy returns passages from “The global burden of women's cancers,” including its References and Conclusions (pages not provided), despite the supplied source title. Searches for “gestational diabetes,” “7.4%,” “Carpenter-Coustan,” and “HAPO” found no passage addressing the claimed U.S. prevalence. The copy therefore cannot verify the claim. (LLM, conf=0.76)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Could not verify
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The criteria for GD were met by 14.3% (672/4697) of mothers overall and by 14.1% (683/4832) of mothers of participating children.”
- Also stated in: § Participants · plain
“Overall, 14.3% (672/4697) of participating mothers had gestational diabetes, which was lower than the 16% anticipated during study planning.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Participants · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the OR was 1.58 (95% CI, 1.24 to 2.01) for children who were obese and the RD was 5.0% (95% CI, 2.0% to 8.0%)”
- Also stated in: § Secondary Outcomes · plain
“In model 4 (fully adjusted model), the OR was 1.58 (95% CI, 1.24-2.01)and the risk difference was 5.0% (95% CI, 2.0%-8.0%)for obesity”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Secondary Outcomes · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“(odds ratio [OR], 3.44 [95% CI, 2.85 to 4.14]; risk difference [RD], 25.7% [95% CI, 21.7% to 29.7%])”
- Also stated in: § Gestational Diabetes Status and Maternal Outcomes Primary Outcome · plain
“The OR was 3.44 (95% CI, 2.85-4.14)for model 3, which adjusted for maternal variables at follow-up, and the risk difference was 25.7% (95% CI, 21.7%-29.7%).”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Gestational Diabetes Status and Maternal Outcomes Primary Outcome · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At the follow-up study visit, mothers with gestational diabetes had higher BMIs and more frequent family histories of diabetes in first-degree relatives.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Participants
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Of 15 812 eligible mother-child pairs (eTable 1 in the Supple- ment), 9322 were screened to confirm eligibility and willing- ness to participate. From these, 4834 children and 4747 moth- ers completed all or part of the study visit, representing 69.1% and 67.8% of the 7000 target, respectively”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Participants
plainn = 4,834- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the OR was 1.57 (95% CI, 1.27 to 1.95) for sum of skinfolds and the RD was 6.5% (95% CI, 3.1% to 9.9%)”
- Also stated in: § Secondary Outcomes · plain
“the OR was 1.57 (95% CI, 1.27-1.95)and the risk difference was 6.5% (95% CI, 3.1%-9.9%)for the sum of skinfolds”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Secondary Outcomes · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the OR was 1.34 (95% CI, 1.08 to 1.67) for waist circumference and the RD was 4.1% (95% CI, 0.8% to 7.3%)”
- Also stated in: § Secondary Outcomes · plain
“the OR was 1.34 (95% CI, 1.08-1.67)and the risk difference was 4.1% (95% CI, 0.8%-7.3%)for waist circumference”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Secondary Outcomes · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The mean BMI, fasting plasma glucose level, 1-hour plasma glucose level, and 2-hour plasma glucose level during the HAPO Study oral glucose tolerance test and race/ethnicity were similar between groups.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Participants
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At the oral glucose tolerance test during the HAPO Study pregnancy, mothers with gestational diabetes were older, weighed more, and had higher BMIs, mean arterial pressures, and glucose concentrations compared with mothers without gestational diabetes.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Participants
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Among women who participated in this follow-up study, the mean age during the HAPO Study was 30.1 years and the frequency of gestational diabetes was 14.3% compared with 29.1 years and 16.3%, respectively, among those women who did not participate (unable to contact or declined) (Table 1).”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Participants
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the OR was 1.35 (95% CI, 1.08 to 1.68) for body fat percentage and the RD was 4.2% (95% CI, 0.9% to 7.4%)”
- Also stated in: § Secondary Outcomes · plain
“the OR was 1.35 (95% CI, 1.08-1.68)and the risk difference was 4.2% (95% CI, 0.9%-7.4%)for body fat percentage”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Secondary Outcomes · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Adjusted for maternal body mass index during pregnancy, the OR was 1.21 (95% CI, 1.00 to 1.46) for children who were overweight or obese and the RD was 3.7% (95% CI, -0.16% to 7.5%)”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The median duration of follow-up was 11.4 years (interquartile range, 10.6-12.2years).”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Participants
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Gestational diabetes was positively associated with these outcomes (model 1), with slight attenuation after adjusting for Tanner stage and maternal variables during pregnancy (models 2 and 3) (Table 3).”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Secondary Outcomes
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In model 4, these differences were attenuated after adjusting for maternal BMI during pregnancy; however, all variables except BMI remained significant.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Secondary Outcomes
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Gestational diabetes was positively associated with childhood overweight or obesity (model 1), with slight attenuation after adjusting for Tanner stage and maternal variables during pregnancy (models 2 and 3) (Table 3).”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Gestational Diabetes Status and Outcomes for Children
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this study, adjusting for maternal BMI attenuated observed associations of gestational diabetes with measures of childhood adiposity, but multiple associations remained significant”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Discussion
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The adjusted mean differences among the offspring of mothers with gestational diabetes vs the offspring of mothers without gestational diabetes were 0.26 (95% CI, -0.06 to 0.57) for BMI, 1.05 (95% CI, 0.24 to 1.85) for body fat percentage, 1.28 (95% CI, 0.43 to 2.14) cm for waist circumference, and 2.52 (95% CI, 0.82 to 4.22) mm for sum of skinfolds.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Secondary Outcomes
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Compared with the offspring of mothers without gestational diabetes, the offspring of mothers with gestational diabetes had higher BMIs, body fat percentages, waist circumferences, and sum of skinfolds.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Secondary Outcomes
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this follow-up study, more than twice as many mothers with IADPSG-defined gestational diabetes compared with mothers with Carpenter-Coustan-defined gestational diabetes (ie, 240 vs 106) developed a disorder of glucose metabolism and there were similar findings for the adiposity outcomes for children.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Discussion
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The risk differences were consistent and there were higher outcome frequencies among mothers with gestational diabetes for model 3 (type 2 diabetes: 7.3% [95% CI, 5.0%-9.6%];prediabetes: 22.8% [95% CI, 18.6%-27.0%]).”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Secondary Outcomes
plaincorrelationaln = 134- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For type 2 diabetes, the OR was 5.38 (95% CI, 3.68-7.86)for model 2 and the OR was 5.44 (95% CI, 3.68-8.08)for model 3.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Secondary Outcomes
plaincorrelationaln = 134- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For prediabetes, the OR was 3.18 (95% CI, 2.63-3.85)for model 2 and the OR was 3.07 (95% CI, 2.53-3.73)for model 3.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Secondary Outcomes
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Among mothers with gestational diabetes, 10.7% (71/663) had type 2 diabetes and 41.5% (275/663) had prediabetes compared with 1.6% (63/3946) and 18.4% (728/3946), respectively, among mothers without gestational diabetes.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Secondary Outcomes
plaincorrelationaln = 134- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Results for the oral glucose tolerance test were not known by the caregivers or the participants unless (1) the fasting plasma glucose level was greater than 105 mg/dL (>5.8 mmol/L), (2) the 2-hour plasma glucose level was greater than 200 mg/dL (>11.1 mmol/L), (3) both of these occurred, (4) either measure yielded a plasma glucose level of less than 45 mg/dL (<2.5 mmol/L), or (5) at 34 to 37 week”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Methods
plainn = 427- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Blinded duplicate samples were assayed several weeks apart and coefficients of variation were calculated within pairs for a random subset of 10%.The mean coefficient of variation was 1.4% for fasting plasma glucose and 1.5% for 2-hour plasma glucose.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Laboratory Measurements
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“model 4: model 3 plus maternal BMI at oral glucose tolerance test during pregnancy.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Outcomes for Children
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“For the least frequent outcome of type 2 diabetes, 14 the conservative estimate that 2.5% of women with gestational diabetes and 1% of women without gestational diabetes would develop type 2 diabetes yielded an OR of 2.54 and required a sample size of 6156 for 90% power at a 2-sided type I error rate of 5%.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Statistical Analyses
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [14] 14. R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2016.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The Hosmer-Lemeshow P values for the logistic regression models ranged from .35 to .99 for the outcomes of mothers and .13 to .99 for the outcomes of children, indicating reasonable model fit.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Model Diagnostics
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Colinearity was not a concern because the pairwise correlations ranged from 0 to 0.20 for the model covariates.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Model Diagnostics
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Logistic regression model fit was measured using the C statistic and confirmed by the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test.17”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Statistical Analyses
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [17] 17. Rubin DB. Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. New York: Wiley; 1987. doi:10.1002 /9780470316696
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Residual plots confirmed linear modeling assumptions and DFbeta statistics indicated no observations of undue influence.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Model Diagnostics
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Multiple models were considered for all outcomes and the independent variables were identified according to the study design, known potential confounders, and the adjustments used for the analyses in the HAPO Study. 1”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Statistical Analyses
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1] 1. Metzger BE, Lowe LP, Dyer AR, et al; HAPO Study Cooperative Research Group. Hyperglycemia and adverse pregnancy outcomes. N Engl J Med. 2008; 358(19):1991-2002. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0707943 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The remaining participants were not treated because they did not meet any of these criteria and they were not informed of their glucose tolerance test results.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Methods
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To exclude type 1 diabetes, serum anti-GAD65, serum anti-insulin, serum anti-ZnT8, and serum anti-IA-2 antibodies were measured at the Barbara Davis Center for all mothers with self-reported treated diabetes or with a new diagnosis of diabetes.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Laboratory Measurements
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For participating mothers and children whose data were analyzed, missing data ranged from 0% to 1.5% for model variables, and most variables had complete data (100%).Only Tanner stage had substantial missingness; 15.2% of girls and 36.3% of boys lacked a trained assessment.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Participants
plainn = 4,832- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“however, additional measures of childhood adiposity may be relevant in interpreting the study findings.”
- Also stated in: § Conclusions · hedged
“however, additional measures of childhood adiposity may be relevant in interpreting the study findings.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Abstract
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Also stated in: § Conclusions · hedged
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Colinearity was evaluated using pairwise correlations.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Statistical Analyses
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“model 3: model 1 plus 2 of the maternal variables at oral glucose tolerance test during pregnancy from model 2 (parity [0, ≥1] and gestational age), plus maternal variables at follow-up (age, height, BMI, family history of diabetes in first-degree relatives, mean arterial pressure, smoking status [yes or no]), alcohol consumption [yes or no]), and the No. of pregnancies subsequent to birth during”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Maternal Outcomes
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In a post hoc analysis, the Bonferroni correction was applied to take into account the multiple comparisons involved in evaluating the secondary outcomes; therefore, P < .025was used for evaluating statistical significance for the 2 secondary outcomes in mothers and P < .0125was used for the 4 secondary outcomes in children.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Statistical Analyses
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This study was powered to detect associations of gestational diabetes with childhood measures of adiposity during 10 to 14 years of follow-up.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Statistical Analyses
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Linear regression model fit was assessed by scatter plots of residuals vs fitted values, histograms and qqplots of residuals, and DFbeta statistics.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Statistical Analyses
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The summary statistics during pregnancy were compared for eligible mothers and for mothers of eligible children who did or did not participate with weighted summaries for nonparticipants to account for varying participation rates at field centers.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Statistical Analyses
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The HAPO Study included women from multiple racial/ethnic groups according to self-report using prespecified categories to describe the study population, ensure broad applicability of the results, and adjust for potential confounding by race/ethnicity due to differences in gestational diabetes or outcome frequencies if not sufficiently modeled by study site (field center).”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Methods
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The study was not powered to examine sex-specific associations.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Statistical Analyses
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The IADPSG criteria for gestational diabetes, which were established based on glucose levels associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes in the HAPO Study and in other studies, identify a larger group of mothers than the Carpenter-Coustan criteria.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Discussion
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In contrast, gestational diabetes prevalence in the HAPO Study was 17.8% using the IADPSG criteria and the prevalence ranged from 15.5% to 25.5% in the North American HAPO Study field centers.22”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [22] 22. Catalano PM, Vargo KM, Bernstein IM, Amini SB. Incidence and risk factors associated with abnormal postpartum glucose tolerance in women with gestational diabetes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1991;165(4 Pt 1):914-919. doi:10.1016/0002-9378(91) 90438-W 25. Löbner K, Knopff A, Baumgarten A, et al. Predictors of postpartum diabetes in women with gestational diabetes mellitus. Diabetes. 2006;55 (3):792-797. doi:10.2337/diabetes.55.03.06 .db05-0746 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“however, social, behavioral, or other differences between participants and nonparticipants that may have confounded associations of gestational diabetes with outcome frequencies cannot be ruled out.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Limitations
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The association of gestational diabetes with childhood overweight or obesity was not statistically significant; however, other childhood adiposity measures may be relevant for interpreting the study findings.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Discussion
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The characteristics of all mothers during pregnancy (regardless of participation) were similar”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“in this blinded observational follow-up study, none were prospectively diagnosed with gestational diabetes.Therefore, treatment was not a confounding factor for maternal and child outcomes.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Sixth, maternal hemoglobin A 1c levels at follow-up were not used.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, the racial/ethnic diversity of the participants make the findings broadly applicable.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Discussion
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This study was not designed to compare women with vs without gestational diabetes defined by the Carpenter-Coustan criteria.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > IADPSG vs Carpenter-Coustan Criteria for Gestational Diabetes
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The C statistics were lowest for model 1 for the outcomes of children (as low as 0.50).The model fit improved for mod-els 2 and 3 for the outcomes of children, with the highest C statistics ranging from 0.68 to 0.74 in model 4.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Model Diagnostics
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Fifth, recruitment was lower than expected.The prespecified recruitment target was 7000 mother-child pairs; recruitment totals were 67.8% for women and 69.1% for children.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The R 2 values ranged from 0.05 to 0.28 for continuous outcomes for children and increased across models 1 through 4, suggesting improved fit for the adjusted models.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Model Diagnostics
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For childhood outcomes in this prospective study, pubertal status was determined and adiposity was characterized using standardized procedures via multiple methods.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This study also addressed limitations of previous studies examining the association of gestational diabetes with childhood adiposity, including lack of complete data on glucose values during pregnancy, maternal BMI, and childhood measures of age-adjusted BMI.30,[36][37][38][39][40]”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites 30,[36][37][38][39][40]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Fourth, beyond family history, paternal data were not available.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Limitations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This subgroup likely would have included mothers with higher outcome frequencies for type 2 diabetes and prediabetes at the time of this follow-up study and children at the highest risk of overweight or obesity; therefore, the reported associations may be underestimates.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Limitations
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The C statistics for the logistic regression models ranged from 0.61 to 0.86 for the outcomes of mothers and increased across models 1 through 3, suggesting better model fit for the outcomes of mothers with covariate adjustments.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Model Diagnostics
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
Whether women meeting the IADPSG criteria for gestational diabetes and their offspring are at risk for long-term adverse outcomes is unclear.
“Whether women meeting the IADPSG criteria for gestational diabetes and their offspring are at risk for long-term adverse outcomes is unclear.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Missing data for Tanner stage are missing at random.
“Multiple imputation under a missing at random assumption 18,19 using the Mice R package 20 was used in the analyses to model the outcomes for children to account for missing data for Tanner stage”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“In general, the IADPSG screening strategy identifies women with milder degrees of hyperglycemia during pregnancy compared to other diagnostic criteria and screening strategies (two-step or selective screening), which might lead to a lower proportion at risk of postpartum glucose intolerance [9,10,11].”
From The Risk for Glucose Intolerance after Gestational Diabetes Mellitus since the Introduction of the IADPSG Criteria: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (2019) · cites this paper as [11]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Perinatal and long-term offspring outcomes following exposure to diabetes in pregnancy are directly related to glycemic control during pregnancy.11,20–22”
From Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (2019) · cites this paper as [21]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“When adjusted for an exhaustive list of potential confounders, the odds ratio for childhood obesity remained at 1.58 (confidence interval [CI], 1.56e2.44).”
From One-step or 2-step testing for gestational diabetes: which is better? (2021) · cites this paper as [33]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The results clearly demonstrate that maternal glycemia is associated with immediate and long-term adverse outcomes for both mother and offspring.”
From Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus (2023) · cites this paper as [268]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“The HAPO FUS documented in both groups that risk of disorders of glucose metabolism at follow-up were associated with GDM and continuously with maternal glucose concentrations (268,269).”
From Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus (2023) · cites this paper as [268]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“A follow-up study of individuals participating in a study of pregnancy OGTTs with glucose levels blinded to caregivers found that 11 years after their pregnancies, individuals who would have been diagnosed with GDM by the one-step approach, as compared with those without GDM, were at 3.4-fold higher risk of developing prediabetes and type 2 diabetes and had children with a higher risk of obesity”
From 2. Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2024 (2024) · cites this paper as [210]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Maternal glycemic dysregulation correlated with increased prevalence of impaired fasting glucose, glucose intolerance, elevated glycated hemoglobin, and pediatric obesity in adolescent offspring.”
From Maternal Overnutrition and Fetal Programming: Long-Term Metabolic, Cognitive, and Epigenetic Consequences (2026) · cites this paper as [32]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“A dose-dependent relationship emerged between maternal antenatal glycemia and offspring metabolic parameters across the continuum of glucose concentrations.”
From Maternal Overnutrition and Fetal Programming: Long-Term Metabolic, Cognitive, and Epigenetic Consequences (2026) · cites this paper as [32]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Findings revealed persistent metabolic consequences of maternal hyperglycemia on long-term offspring glucose homeostasis, notably extending to glycemic levels below current GDM diagnostic thresholds.”
From Maternal Overnutrition and Fetal Programming: Long-Term Metabolic, Cognitive, and Epigenetic Consequences (2026) · cites this paper as [32]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Exploratory analyses of the HAPO follow-up study demonstrated a significant increasing trend of worse maternal (glycemic profile) and offspring (adiposity) outcomes from non-GDM to GDM exclusively by the IADPSG criteria to GDM by the Carpenter-Coustan criteria [85].”
From Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: Diagnostic Approaches and Maternal-Offspring Complications (2022) · cites this paper as [85]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome (HAPO) study 1 and subsequently follow‐up studies 2 , 3 , 4 have reported that gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated with various adverse pregnancy outcomes, which increases the mother's susceptibility to developing type 2 diabetes, and the child's susceptibility to developing obesity and impaired glucose tolerance in the future 3 , 4 , 5”
From Clinical challenges in early pregnancy in Japan: An update on gestational diabetes (2024) · cites this paper as [2]
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“However, many researchers consider GDM treatment highly cost-effective when the benefits of future maternal T2DM and childhood obesity risk reduction are taken into account32,42–45.”
From A global view of hypertensive disorders and diabetes mellitus during pregnancy (2022) · cites this paper as [44]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“In light of this evidence, early diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is crucial, as it predisposes offspring to the early development of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular diseases and allows for the timely improvement and optimization of clinical management and therapeutic interventions [31,32,33,34].”
From Maternal Overnutrition and Fetal Programming: Long-Term Metabolic, Cognitive, and Epigenetic Consequences (2026) · cites this paper as [32]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Conversely, maternal glucose elevation demonstrated inverse associations with offspring insulin sensitivity and homeostatic model assessment (HOMA) indices at 14 years, with these relationships persisting after statistical adjustment for maternal body mass index, offspring BMI, and familial diabetes predisposition.”
From Maternal Overnutrition and Fetal Programming: Long-Term Metabolic, Cognitive, and Epigenetic Consequences (2026) · cites this paper as [32]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Furthermore, recent evidence shows that there is increased glucose-linked hypothalamic activation in offspring who were previously exposed to maternal obesity and GDM in utero, which represents one possible mechanism for this increased childhood obesity risk [31,32,60,61].”
From Maternal Overnutrition and Fetal Programming: Long-Term Metabolic, Cognitive, and Epigenetic Consequences (2026) · cites this paper as [32]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“In general, the IADPSG screening strategy identifies women with milder degrees of hyperglycemia during pregnancy compared to other diagnostic criteria and screening strategies (two-step or selective screening), which might lead to a lower proportion at risk of postpartum glucose intolerance [9,10,11].”
From The Risk for Glucose Intolerance after Gestational Diabetes Mellitus since the Introduction of the IADPSG Criteria: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (2019) · cites this paper as [11]
In the citing paper
“A follow-up of the HAPO study 10–14 years postpartum showed that untreated women with GDM, defined post hoc by the IADPSG criteria, had significantly higher rates of a glucose metabolism disorder than women without GDM (52.2% vs. 20.1% (T2DM 10.7% vs. 1.6%)) [11].”
From The Risk for Glucose Intolerance after Gestational Diabetes Mellitus since the Introduction of the IADPSG Criteria: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (2019) · cites this paper as [11]
In the citing paper
“However, GDM, according to the CC criteria, was associated with a much higher risk for T2DM (20% vs. 7.9%) compared to women with GDM according to the IADPSG criteria alone [11].”
From The Risk for Glucose Intolerance after Gestational Diabetes Mellitus since the Introduction of the IADPSG Criteria: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (2019) · cites this paper as [11]
In the citing paper
“A follow-up of the HAPO study 10–14 years postpartum showed that untreated women with GDM, defined post hoc by the IADPSG criteria, had significantly higher rates of a glucose metabolism disorder than women without GDM (52.2% vs. 20.1% (T2DM 10.7% vs. 1.6%)) [11].”
From The Risk for Glucose Intolerance after Gestational Diabetes Mellitus since the Introduction of the IADPSG Criteria: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (2019) · cites this paper as [11]
In the citing paper
“Potential adverse offspring outcomes vary by age group (Table 4) and avoidance of one outcome does not indicate reduction in risk of other adverse outcomes.21,24,25”
From Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (2019) · cites this paper as [21]
In the citing paper
“This study, along with others,44,45 extended earlier findings of higher weight among offspring of mothers with diabetes by demonstrating specific increases in adipose tissue using several methodologies, including skinfold thicknesses with calipers, waist circumference, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, and air displacement plethysmography.”
From Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (2019) · cites this paper as [21]
In the citing paper
“Only recently has the finding of excessive adiposity among GDM offspring been documented in childhood.21”
From Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (2019) · cites this paper as [21]
In the citing paper
“The HAPO Followup Study (FUS) demonstrated that offspring exposed to mild, untreated maternal hyperglycemia had higher rates of adiposity at a mean age of 11.4 years.21”
From Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (2019) · cites this paper as [21]
In the citing paper
“These results were somewhat attenuated by maternal BMI.”
From Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (2019) · cites this paper as [21]
In the citing paper
“Increased rates of adiposity and disorders of glucose metabolism in peripubertal offspring of mothers with mild, untreated GDM have been demonstrated.21”
From Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (2019) · cites this paper as [21]
In the citing paper
“When 681 offspring of HAPO women whose pregnancy OGTTs met the IADPSG criteria for GDM were compared with 4094 offspring of mothers whose pregnancy OGTTs did not meet GDM criteria, at an average 11 years of age, obesity rates were 19% vs 10%.33”
From One-step or 2-step testing for gestational diabetes: which is better? (2021) · cites this paper as [33]
In the citing paper
“Even when adjusted for multiple potential confounders, the odds ratio was 3.44 (CI, 2.85e4.14).”
From One-step or 2-step testing for gestational diabetes: which is better? (2021) · cites this paper as [33]
In the citing paper
“At approximately 11 years after their HAPO pregnancies, 52% of 663 HAPO participants who had GDM based on their pregnancy OGTTs meeting the IADPSG criteria for GDM had diabetes”
From One-step or 2-step testing for gestational diabetes: which is better? (2021) · cites this paper as [33]
In the citing paper
“These associations demonstrate that, similar to the short-term outcomes of the HAPO Study, associations of disorders of glucose metabolism and long-term adverse outcomes are continuous and graded and that mothers with IADPSG GDM and their offspring have predictable long-term adverse outcomes which are intermediate between non-GDMs and Carpenter and Coustan GDMs.”
From One-step or 2-step testing for gestational diabetes: which is better? (2021) · cites this paper as [33]
In the citing paper
“A “missing at random” assumption was used after confirming findings varied little under “missing not at random” (14).”
From Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome Follow-up Study (HAPO FUS): Maternal Glycemia and Childhood Glucose Metabolism (2019) · cites this paper as [14]
In the citing paper
“The recruitment target was 7,000 pairs, based on the primary childhood outcome of overweight/obesity (14).”
From Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome Follow-up Study (HAPO FUS): Maternal Glycemia and Childhood Glucose Metabolism (2019) · cites this paper as [14]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Model Diagnostics
“with the highest C statistics ranging from 0.68 to 0.74 in model 4.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Conclusions
“Model 4 f 5.0 (2.0 to 8.0) .001 1.58 (1.24 to 2.01) <.001 0.78 0.26 (-0.06 to 0.57) h”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Secondary Outcomes
“19.1% (130/681) were obese compared with 9.9% (405/4094) of children whose mothers did not have gestational diabetes.”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Conclusions
“| Obesity f | 91/522 (17.4) | 39/159 (24.5) | 405/4095 (9.9) |”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Conclusions
“| Composite of type 2 diabetes | 346/663 (52.2) | 791/3946 (20.1) |”
§ Association of Gestational Diabetes With Maternal Disorders of Glucose Metabolism and Childhood Adiposity > Conclusions
“| Disorder of glucose metabolism d,e | 240/508 (47.2) | 106/155 (68.4) | 791/3945 (20.0) |”
Citations
Cites
R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing
R Core Team (2000) · doi:10.32614/r.manuals · Cited by 355,893
(1990) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.27-3338 · Cited by 35,305
Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys
Rubin, D. B. (1987) · Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics · doi:10.1002/9780470316696 · Cited by 20,701
Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes Mellitus
American Diabetes Association (2010) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc11-s062 · Cited by 14,094
mice: Multivariate Imputation by Chained Equations in R
Buuren, S. V., & Groothuis-Oudshoorn, K. (2011) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v045.i03 · Cited by 13,870
Hosmer, D. W., Lemeshow, S., & Sturdivant, R. X. (2013) · Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics · doi:10.1002/9781118548387 · Cited by 13,861
(2010) · University of Twente Research Information · Cited by 6,037
Diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus
American Diabetes Association (2014) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc14-s081 · Cited by 5,974
Hyperglycemia and adverse pregnancy outcomes
(2008) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa0707943 · Cited by 5,563
International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups Consensus Panel (2010) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc09-1848 · Cited by 5,390
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- International Diabetes Federation, 2017, IDF Diabetes Atlas
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2023 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association
Tsao, C. W., Aday, A. W., Almarzooq, Z. I., Anderson, C. A. M., Arora, P., Avery, C. L., Baker-Smith, C. M., Beaton, A. Z., Boehme, A. K., Buxton, A. E., et al. (2023) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000001123 · Cited by 8,300
Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2022 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association
Tsao, C. W., Aday, A. W., Almarzooq, Z. I., Alonso, A., Beaton, A. Z., Bittencourt, M. S., Boehme, A. K., Buxton, A. E., Carson, A. P., Commodore-Mensah, Y., et al. (2022) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000001052 · Cited by 5,987
Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2021 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association
Virani, S. S., Alonso, A., Aparicio, H. J., Benjamin, E. J., Bittencourt, M. S., Callaway, C. W., Carson, A. P., Chamberlain, A. M., Cheng, S., Delling, F. N., et al. (2021) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000000950 · Cited by 5,784
2. Classification and Diagnosis of Diabetes: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2022
American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee (2022) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc22-s002 · Cited by 4,792
“4-fold higher risk of developing prediabetes and type 2 diabetes and had children with a higher risk of obesity and increased body fat, suggesting that the larger group of women identified by the one-step approach would benefit from the increased screening for diabetes and prediabetes that would accompany a history of…”
Background2. Classification and Diagnosis of Diabetes: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2020
American Diabetes Association (2020) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc20-s002 · Cited by 3,187
“4-fold higher risk of developing prediabetes and type 2 diabetes and had children with a higher risk of obesity and increased body fat, suggesting that the larger group of women identified by the one-step approach would benefit from increased screening for diabetes and prediabetes that would accompany a history of GDM…”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Lowe, W. L., Scholtens, D. M., Lowe, L. P., Kuang, A., Nodzenski, M., Talbot, O., Catalano, P. M., Linder, B., Brickman, W. J., Clayton, P., Deerochanawong, C., Hamilton, J., Josefson, J. L., Lashley, M., Lawrence, J. M., Lebenthal, Y., Ma, R., Maresh, M., McCance, D., Tam, W. H., Sacks, D. A., Dyer, A. R., Metzger, B. E., & for the HAPO Follow-up Study Cooperative Research Group
- Affiliations
- Northwestern University (US)
- MetroHealth Medical Center (US)
- National Institutes of Health (US)
- Manchester Academic Health Science Centre (GB)
- Rajavithi Hospital (TH)
- University of Toronto (CA)
- Queen Elizabeth Hospital, School of Clinical Medicine and Research, University of the West Indies, Barbados
- Kaiser Permanente (US)
- Tel Aviv University (IL)
- Chinese University of Hong Kong, Prince of Wales Hospital, Hong Kong, China
- Royal Victoria Hospital (GB)
- Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK)
- Corresponding author
- Metzger, Boyd E.
- ORCID
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2018-09-11
- Volume
- 320
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1005
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- PMC
- PMC6143108
- OpenAlex
- W2892298718
- Cited by
- 591
- References
- 48
- Citations by year
- 2026: 56 · 2025: 77 · 2024: 86 · 2023: 80 · 2022: 83 · 2021: 74 · 2020: 89 · 2019: 42 · 2018: 3
- FWCI
- 58.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- JAMA (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (UL1TR001422)
- National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (U01DK094830)
- National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Gestational Diabetes Research and Management
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Birth, Development, and Health
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
- Keywords
- gestational diabetes mellitus, maternal glucose metabolism, childhood adiposity, type 2 diabetes, prediabetes, childhood obesity, postpartum follow-up, HAPO study, skinfold thickness, waist circumference, body fat percentage
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Blood Glucose, Child, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Prediabetic State, Pregnancy, Body Mass Index, Diabetes, Gestational, Adiposity, Waist Circumference, Pediatric Obesity
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
