Cited by 114Gestational Diabetes Research and ManagementNatural Antidiabetic Agents StudiesPregnancy and Medication Impact

Effect of dietary myo-inositol supplementation in pregnancy on the incidence of maternal gestational diabetes mellitus and fetal outcomes: a randomized controlled trial

Matarrelli, Barbara, Vitacolonna, Ester, D’angelo, Matteo, Pavone, Giulia, Mattei, Peter A., Liberati, Marco, Celentano, Claudio·2013·The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that dietary myo-inositol may improve insulin resistance and the development of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in women at high risk of this disorder. DESIGN: A prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled clinical trial, pilot study. PARTICIPANTS: Non-obese singleton pregnant women with an elevated fasting glucose in the first or early second trimester were studied throughout pregnancy. INTERVENTION: Supplementation with myo-inositol or placebo during pregnancy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Development of GDM on a 75 g oral glucose tolerance test at 24-28 weeks' gestation. Secondary outcome measures were increased in BMI, need for maternal insulin therapy, macrosomia, polyhydramnios, neonatal birthweight and hypoglycemia. RESULTS: Thirty-six women were allocated to receive myo-inositol and 39 placebo. The incidence of GDM in mid-pregnancy was significantly reduced (p = 0.001) in women randomized to receive myo-inositol compared to placebo (relative risk 0.127). Women randomized to receive myo-inositol also required less insulin therapy, delivered at a later gestational age, had significantly smaller babies with fewer episodes of neonatal hypoglycemia. CONCLUSIONS: Myo-inositol supplementation in pregnancy reduced the incidence of GDM in women at high risk of this disorder. The reduction in incidence of GDM in the treatment arm was accompanied by improved outcomes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3109/14767058.2013.766691

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Matarrelli, B., Vitacolonna, E., D’angelo, M., Pavone, G., Mattei, P. A., Liberati, M., & Celentano, C.
Affiliations
University of Chieti-Pescara (IT)
Corresponding author
Celentano, Claudio
Venue
The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine
Published
2013-03
Volume
26
Issue
10
Pages
967-972
ISSN
  • 1476-4954 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-7058
OpenAlex
W2103767048
Cited by
114
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 4
FWCI
8.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Italfarmaco
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Gestational Diabetes Research and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Natural Antidiabetic Agents Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Pregnancy and Medication Impact
Keywords
myo-inositol, dietary supplementation, gestational diabetes mellitus, insulin resistance, pregnancy, neonatal hypoglycemia, macrosomia, polyhydramnios, birth weight, high-risk pregnancy
MeSH terms
Adult, Double-Blind Method, Female, Fetus, Glucose Tolerance Test, Humans, Inositol, Insulin Resistance, Middle Aged, Pilot Projects, Placebos, Pregnancy, Incidence, Case-Control Studies, Diabetes, Gestational, Dietary Supplements, Young Adult

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.

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