<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<recommendedContent xmlns="http://api.mspoke.com">
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_412"
                     title="Depression During Pregnancy Linked to Kids&apos; Behavior Problems (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.012"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Psychiatry/Depression/tb/18321?impressionId=1265745708882"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;Children born to mothers who were depressed during pregnancy were more than twice as likely to display antisocial behavior by age 16 as children whose mothers had not been depressed, researchers found.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Of 120 mothers from South London who were followed from pregnancy through their children&apos;s teen years, 31% had depression during pregnancy, according to Dale Hay, PhD, of Cardiff University in Wales, and colleagues.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Children born to these women were significantly more likely to display antisocial behavior (OR 2.46, 95% CI 1.10 to 5.48) and commit violent acts (OR 4.36, 95% CI 1.54 to 12.41) before age 16, the researchers reported in the January/February issue of &lt;em&gt;Child Development&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The associations were magnified in women who also had a history of behavior problems when they were children.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;A focus on mothers&apos; history of conduct problems and depression during pregnancy, as opposed to broader measures of the social environment, would hold promise for more targeted early interventions to prevent the development of serious antisocial behavior,&quot; Hay&apos;s group wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Previous studies have linked mothers&apos; mental health problems in pregnancy with disruptive behaviors in their children, but it&apos;s unclear what explains the relationship, according to the researchers.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;To explore the issue, they turned to the South London Child Development Study, which prospectively followed 120 pregnant women and their children into the teenage years.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;All families came from a relatively disadvantaged urban area. These families were more likely to belong to the working class and to be from ethnic minority groups than the general U.K. population.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;One-third of the children had been arrested or diagnosed with a conduct disorder by age 16. Of these 88.9% had been arrested and 45% had committed violent acts, including theft from a person, violent disorder, fighting, carrying a weapon, and assault.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The association between maternal depression during pregnancy and risk of antisocial behavior remained relatively constant in analyses controlling for family environment, a child&apos;s exposure to maternal depression after birth, mothers&apos; substance use during pregnancy, and parental antisocial behavior.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;None of the factors fully explained the relationship. Neither did the arrest history of the biological father.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But, the researchers wrote in the paper, &quot;it would be unwise to conclude that paternal risk factors are unimportant, given that we did not have more detailed information about the father&apos;s own history of conduct disorders.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They explored several potential mechanisms for the link between maternal depression and a child&apos;s behavior problems: &lt;ul&gt; &lt;li&gt;Direct effects on the fetus from biological correlates of the mothers&apos; depressive symptoms&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Depression in pregnancy as a sign of environmental adversity&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Re-exposure to maternal depression after birth&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Indirect effects of depression on the developing fetus driven by mothers&apos; smoking, drinking, and drug taking during pregnancy &lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;A genetic explanation whereby women who experience depression in pregnancy may also have a greater genetic risk for antisocial behavior, which they pass on to their offspring &lt;/li&gt; &lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Hay and her colleagues noted that these explanations are not necessarily mutually exclusive.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They also acknowledged some limitations of the study, including the lack of information about fetal growth and neuroendocrine measures on the mother and child and the relatively small sample size.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The SLCDS has been funded by U.K. project grants from the Medical Research Council, by the Psychiatric Research Trust, and by the South West G.P. Trust. The current analysis was partially supported by an Economic and Social Research Council studentship to one of Hay&apos;s co-authors and by a Medical Research Council U.K. Program Grant.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The authors did not report any conflicts of interest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_355"
                     title="Obesity Delays Puberty in Boys (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.009"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Pediatrics/Obesity/tb/18235?impressionId=1265745708882"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;Unlike overweight girls, who tend to enter puberty early, overweight and obese boys in the U.S. may begin puberty later than thin boys, according to one of the first longitudinal studies of weight and timing of puberty in males.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;At 11.5 years, boys with the highest body mass index (mean BMI z score=1.84) were 165% more likely to be prepubertal than the thinnest boys (95% CI 1.05 to 6.61; &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.04), researchers reported online in the Feb. 1 &lt;em&gt;Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;This longitudinal study provides further evidence that higher BMI during early and middle childhood is not associated with earlier pubertal onset in boys, contrary to what is seen in girls,&quot; Joyce M. Lee, MD, MPH, of the University of Michigan, and colleagues wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;In fact, higher BMI in earlier childhood may be associated with and precede later onset of puberty among a population-based sample of U.S. boys.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Rates of obesity among American girls and boys have nearly tripled since the 1960s, prompting concerns about the effect of excess weight on growth and development. Most research has focused on obese girls, who appear to reach puberty earlier than thin girls. A recent cross-sectional study suggested that, unlike their female counterparts, overweight boys may develop later.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;To further explore this relationship, Lee and colleagues analyzed the records of 401 boys from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds in ten regions of the U.S., using data from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development. The participants were full-term, only children born in 1991.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The data included height and weight measurements of the children from ages 2 to 12 years and a visual assessment of whether the children had begun puberty, using Tanner genitalia staging, at 9.5, 10.5, and 11.5 years. Boys were defined as prepubertal if they were Tanner stage 1 at 11.5 years old and were otherwise categorized as pubertal.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Among the participants, 14.4% were overweight (BMI &amp;#8805; 85th and &amp;lt;95th percentiles) and 19.4% were obese (BMI&amp;#8805;95th percentile) at age 11.5. Overall, 49 boys (12.2%) were prepubertal at age 11.5 years by Tanner genitalia staging.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The authors wrote that their findings have important implications for understanding sex differences in physiological mechanisms of puberty.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They noted that puberty is regulated by the gonadotropin-releasing hormone axis for both girls and boys, but it&apos;s unclear why such different associations between body fat and the timing of pubertal onset would exist between the sexes.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Given the recent childhood obesity epidemic, additional studies are needed to further investigate the epidemiological link between body fat and pubertal initiation and progression in boys as well as the physiological mechanisms responsible,&quot; they concluded.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The authors were unable to analyze the data based on race, because most of the children in the study were white. They also noted that BMI is a surrogate measure of overall body fat, and that study has found that the relationship between body fat and BMI varies depending on race. They also recommended that future studies use multiple methods of determining whether children have entered puberty.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was funded by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development and the American Heart Association.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The authors reported no financial conflicts of interest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_299"
                     title="Teen Pregnancies, Births, and Abortions Increase"
                     score="0.005"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/OBGYN/Pregnancy/tb/18162?impressionId=1265745708882"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;After a decade of decline, the rate of teenage pregnancies increased by 3% in 2006 as 750,000 women younger than 20 became pregnant, according to a report released by the Guttmacher Institute.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;And as pregnancies increased, so did births  --  41.9 births per 1,000 U.S. teenage girls, which was 4% higher than in 2005  --  and abortions, which increased by 1% from 2005 to 2006.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In a prepared statement, Planned Parenthood blamed abstinence-only sex education programs for the uptick.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;It is a tragedy that after a decade of progress in reducing the rate of teenage pregnancy we are witnessing a substantial increase in the number of teens who are getting pregnant,&quot; Planned Parenthood said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In a statement released last May in conjunction with the &quot;National Day to Prevent Teen Pregnancy&quot; the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), agreed that comprehensive sex education was likely to be more effective than abstinence-only programs.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Abstinence works for some teens, but the idea that most teens will wait to have sex indefinitely is rigid and impractical,&quot; said Richard S. Guido, MD, chair of the ACOG&apos;s Committee on Adolescent Health Care.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But the Guttmacher report suggested that the reasons for increase may be more complex, including &quot;shifts in the racial and ethnic composition of the population, increases in poverty, the growth of abstinence-only sex education programs at the expense of comprehensive programs, and changes in public perception and attitudes toward both teenage and unintended pregnancy.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Among black teenagers the pregnancy rate was 126.3 per 1,000 versus 44 per 1,000 non-Hispanic white teenagers.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;A breakdown by state revealed that New Mexico had the highest teenage pregnancy rate, followed by Nevada, Arizona, Texas, and Mississippi.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Conversely, the lowest teenage pregnancy rate was in New Hampshire  --  33 pregnancies per 1,000  --  followed by Vermont, Maine, Minnesota, and North Dakota.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Texas had the highest rate of births to teenage mothers  --  62 per 1,000  --  and New York had the highest rate of abortions among teenagers, 41 per 1,000.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The report was based on data from the National Center for Health Statistics of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (number of births), the Guttmacher Institute (total number of abortions), the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (age and race/ethnicity distribution of women obtaining abortions), and the Population Estimates Program of the U.S. Bureau of the Census in collaboration with NCHS (population estimates).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Among other findings in the report: &lt;ul&gt; &lt;li&gt;The pregnancy rate was 71.5 pregnancies per 1,000 girls ages 15-19 and pregnancies occurred among 7% of females in this age group.&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Although teenage abortions increased by 1% from 2005 to 2006, the overall teenage abortion rate declined by about a third over the two decades from 1986 to 2006.&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;The increase in teen pregnancies and births to teenage mothers was observed across all racial and ethnic groups.&lt;/li&gt; &lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The authors said that additional research was needed to determine if the disparities in rates by both race and region carry over to adult women.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The report was prepared by Kathryn Kost, Stanley Henshaw, and Liz Carlin of the Guttmacher Institute.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Lawrence Finer, Rebecca Wind, Susheela Singh, and Laura Lindberg provided comments on early drafts.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The report was funded by grants from the Brush Foundation, The California Wellness Foundation (TCWF) and the Annie E. Casey Foundation. The Guttmacher Institute also gratefully acknowledges the general support it receives from individuals and foundations, including major grants from The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, The David and Lucile Packard Foundation, and the Ford Foundation, which undergirds all of the Institute&apos;s work.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_244"
                     title="No Explanation for Smaller Babies"
                     score="0.001"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/OBGYN/GeneralOBGYN/tb/18095?impressionId=1265745708882"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;The birth weight of term babies appears to be dropping in America without much explanation as to why, researchers said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Mean birth weight dropped 52 g (1.8 oz) overall from 1990 through 2005, according to Emily Oken, MD, MPH, of Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care in Boston, and colleagues.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Fewer babies were large for gestational age as well in 2005  --  a 1.4% drop from 1990, they reported in the February issue of &lt;em&gt;Obstetrics &amp;amp; Gynecology&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;These changes among term, singleton births &quot;were not explained by trends in maternal and neonatal characteristics, changes in obstetric practices, or concurrent decreases in gestational length,&quot; Oken&apos;s group wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;What consequence these modest changes over time might have for infants is unclear, but size at birth is known to predict long-term health and chronic disease risk, the researchers noted.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The trend toward declining birth weight for gestational age appeared to be a continuation of that reported from the 1980s to 1990s.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Mean birth weight had previously been on the rise since the 1950s, but U.S. national surveillance data suggesting a reversal in this trend didn&apos;t account for an increase in preterm deliveries and other factors.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;So, the researchers looked at the national trend by analyzing a total of 36,827,828 singleton births carried to term (37 to 41 weeks), along with data on their mothers in the National Center for Health Statistics Natality Data Sets for the years 1990 through 2005.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The researchers excluded births in California, &quot;which does not report maternal weight gain during pregnancy,&quot; and those without recorded gestational age, birth weight, or neonatal sex.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;During this decade and a half, there were no clear shifts in the proportion of infants who were boys, who were firstborns, or whose mothers had received first trimester prenatal care.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Trends in maternal characteristics linked to fetal growth were mixed.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;On the one hand, there was an increase in maternal characteristics linked to greater fetal growth: more education, older age, diabetes before or during pregnancy, gestational weight gain of at least 46 lb, and nonsmoking during pregnancy.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the other direction, there was also an increase in neonates born to mothers with hypertension, gestational weight gain under 16 lb, and who were Hispanic or black or unmarried.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Cesarean delivery dropped from 22.0% in 1990 to 19.8% in 1995 and then rose to 28.3% in 2005.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;A recent &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.medpagetoday.com/Pediatrics/GeneralPediatrics/17619&quot; mce_href=&quot;http://www.medpagetoday.com/Pediatrics/GeneralPediatrics/17619&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;national study &lt;/a&gt;has suggested that this increase in C-section has continued, reaching 31.8% of all births in 2007.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But across every maternal characteristic, there was a mean drop in birth weight from 2000 to 2005.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The decline was particularly steep, at 79 g (2.8 oz) from 1990 to 2005 in a homogenous subgroup limited to low-risk infants who had not been induced or delivered by cesarean section  --  an analysis designed &quot;to account for trends in maternal and neonatal characteristics and obstetric practices.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Among these low-risk births, decreases were seen within each gestational age group from 37 to 41 weeks, though the greatest declines were in the highest gestational age group (-71g versus -9 g in the 37-weeks group).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Large-for-gestational-age births became less common after 2000, dropping to 8.9% by 2005, compared with a fairly stable 10.3% from 1990 to 2000.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Again, this downward trend was more noticeable in the low-risk subgroup.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Small-for-gestational-age births, though taking a small dip between 1996 and 1999, have remained fairly steady at 10.2% to 10.3% over the 16-year study period.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Among low-risk infants, the trend in low-weight births increased from 1990 to 2005 (from 7.2% to 8.1%).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Gestational duration dropped by an average of 2.4 days overall, by 2.31 days in the low-risk subgroup, and for those born after induction of labor, cesarean delivery, or both.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Regression analyses seeking to explain the trends in birth weight showed attenuation of the trend, with adjustment for gestational age at birth and amplification by adjustment for maternal height and body mass index before pregnancy.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However, none of the analyses showed a clear explanation, the researchers said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They cautioned that despite the large nationally representative sample, birth record data is inherently limited, since gestational length may not be accurate.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The study also lacked data on potentially important factors not included in the birth records, such as maternal diet, stress, and socioeconomics, they added.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health. The researchers reported no conflicts of interest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_235"
                     title="Congenital Anomalies Linked to Mom&apos;s Diabetes (CME/CE)"
                     score="-0"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/OBGYN/Pregnancy/tb/18065?impressionId=1265745708882"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;Pregestational maternal diabetes was associated with an increased risk of a major congenital anomaly, but obesity itself was not, a cross-sectional study found.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In a multivariable logistic model, the major contributor to a rising rate of congenital anomalies was maternal pregestational diabetes (OR 3.8, 95% CI 2.1 to 6.6), according to Joseph R. Biggio, Jr., MD, and colleagues from the University of Alabama at Birmingham.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Because hyperglycemia is a major contributor to developmental malformations, interventions to address obesity and identify women at risk for diabetes and hyperglycemia should be considered in efforts to reduce the occurrence of congenital anomalies,&quot; they wrote in the February issue of &lt;em&gt;Obstetrics &amp;amp; Gynecology.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Maternal obesity has been linked with numerous problems, including preeclampsia, gestational diabetes, fetal and neonatal death, and birth trauma, but scientists have disagreed over whether it also contributes to the risk of fetal malformations, the researchers noted.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;To help settle the issue, Biggio and colleagues used a perinatal database in their university health system that included all women with singletons delivered between 1991 and 2004.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They divided the cohort into three time periods  --  1991 to 1994, 1995 to 1999, and 2000 to 2004, with a total of 41,902 pregnancies.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For their primary analysis, they defined maternal obesity as a first prenatal visit weight greater than 200 lb, because during the earlier epochs many women did not have body mass index (BMI) calculated. For their secondary analyses they used BMI greater than 29 kg/m&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; as the criterion for obesity.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In each epoch, there were increases in mean maternal weight, mean BMI, the proportion of women weighing more than 200 lb, the proportion with a BMI greater than 29 kg/m&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;, and the prevalence of pregestational diabetes (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.001 for all).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Univariable analysis determined that the rate of major anomalies, particularly involving the cardiac and pulmonary systems, also increased during each time period.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But there was no independent association between congenital anomalies and maternal obesity using either definition, during any of the three time periods or during the study overall.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Although no direct association was seen between congenital malformations and maternal obesity, the investigators reported that the proportion of anomalies that could be attributed to obesity increased from 0% to 23% during the overall study period.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The proportion of anomalies that could be attributed to diabetes ranged from 58% to 76%.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Moreover, for obese women with diabetes the proportion of anomalies attributed to diabetes increased sharply, from 48% in the first epoch to 74% in the third epoch.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In contrast, for the obstetric population as a whole, the population-attributable risk of congenital malformation related to obesity rose from near zero in the first epoch to 6.1% in the third epoch, while that related to diabetes increased from 3.3% to 9.2%, the investigators reported.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;During the course of the study there was a nearly 15-lb increase in maternal weight and a 30% increase in the proportion of women whose BMI exceeded 29 kg/m&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;There also was a nearly twofold increase in the rate of major anomalies  --  and a 250% increase in the prevalence of diabetes.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The authors observed that there has been much interest in the effects of maternal obesity on birth defects.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Although the pathophysiologic basis for this possible association have not been identified, hypotheses have included increased serum insulin, lower levels of folic acid, chronic hypoxia, and increased inflammatory mediators.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Our study provides evidence that the defects may not be due solely to the maternal obesity per se but may be due to undiagnosed diabetes,&quot; the investigators wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;From a public health standpoint, the study findings suggest that efforts to reduce the prevalence of congenital anomalies should be focused less on obesity and aimed more closely at correcting hyperglycemia.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;If euglycemia could be achieved before pregnancy, or at least embryogenesis and organogenesis, the majority of these anomalies could potentially be avoided,&quot; they observed.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They also suggested that even women of normal weight, but with other diabetes risk factors, could benefit from closer attention to glycemic control.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;A weakness of the study was the fact that detailed data on glycemic control was not available in the perinatal database, &quot;and therefore we cannot comment on the association between glycemic control and anomaly rates,&quot; the investigators wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was supported in part by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The authors did not report any potential conflicts of interest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
</recommendedContent>