AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Our aim was to test the hypothesis that gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in mothers is associated with poorer cognitive ability in their offspring in India. METHODS: During 1997 to 1998 maternal GDM status was assessed by OGTT at 30 +/- 2 weeks of gestation. Between 2007 and 2008, at a mean age of 9.7 years, 515 children (32 offspring of GDM mothers [ODM]; 483 offspring of non-GDM mothers [controls]) from the Mysore Parthenon birth cohort underwent cognitive function assessment using tests from the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children--Second Edition and additional tests measuring learning, long-term storage/retrieval, short-term memory, reasoning, attention and concentration, and visuo-spatial and verbal abilities. RESULTS: Compared with controls, ODM scored higher in tests for learning, long-term retrieval/storage (p = 0.008), reasoning (p = 0.02), verbal ability (p = 0.01), and attention and concentration (p = 0.003). In multiple regression, adjusted for the child's age, sex, gestation, neonatal weight and head circumference, maternal age, parity and BMI, and the parent's socioeconomic status, education and rural/urban residence, this difference remained significant only for learning, long-term retrieval/storage (beta = 0.4 SD (95% CI 0.01-0.75); p = 0.04) and verbal ability (beta = 0.5 SD (95% CI 0.09-0.83); p = 0.02), and not with other test scores. CONCLUSIONS/ INTERPRETATION: In this population of healthy Indian children, there was no evidence of lower cognitive ability in ODM. In fact some cognitive scores were higher in ODM.
AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Our aim was to test the hypothesis that gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in mothers is associated with poorer cognitive ability in their offspring in India. METHODS: During 1997 to 1998 maternal GDM status was assessed by OGTT at 30 +/- 2 weeks of gestation. Between 2007 and 2008, at a mean age of 9.7 years, 515 children (32 offspring of GDM mothers [ODM]; 483 offspring of non-GDM mothers [controls]) from the Mysore Parthenon birth cohort underwent cognitive function assessment using tests from the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children--Second Edition and additional tests measuring learning, long-term storage/retrieval, short-term memory, reasoning, attention and concentration, and visuo-spatial and verbal abilities. RESULTS: Compared with controls, ODM scored higher in tests for learning, long-term retrieval/storage (p = 0.008), reasoning (p = 0.02), verbal ability (p = 0.01), and attention and concentration (p = 0.003). In multiple regression, adjusted for the child's age, sex, gestation, neonatal weight and head circumference, maternal age, parity and BMI, and the parent's socioeconomic status, education and rural/urban residence, this difference remained significant only for learning, long-term retrieval/storage (beta = 0.4 SD (95% CI 0.01-0.75); p = 0.04) and verbal ability (beta = 0.5 SD (95% CI 0.09-0.83); p = 0.02), and not with other test scores. CONCLUSIONS/ INTERPRETATION: In this population of healthy Indian children, there was no evidence of lower cognitive ability in ODM. In fact some cognitive scores were higher in ODM.
Authors: Jacqueline C Hill; Ghattu Vedamurthy Krishnaveni; I Annamma; Samantha D Leary; Caroline H D Fall Journal: Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 3.636
Authors: Sargoor R Veena; Ghattu V Krishnaveni; Andrew K Wills; Anura V Kurpad; Sumithra Muthayya; Jacqueline C Hill; Samuel C Karat; Kiran K Nagarajaiah; Caroline H D Fall; Krishnamachari Srinivasan Journal: Pediatr Res Date: 2010-04 Impact factor: 3.756
Authors: Ilkka Järvinen; Jyrki Launes; Jari Lipsanen; Maarit Virta; Ritva Vanninen; Eliisa Lehto; Nella Schiavone; Annamari Tuulio-Henriksson; Laura Hokkanen Journal: Front Public Health Date: 2022-07-01
Authors: Ghattu V Krishnaveni; Sargoor R Veena; Jacqueline C Hill; Samuel C Karat; Caroline H D Fall Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2014-03-07 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Tine D Clausen; Erik L Mortensen; Lone Schmidt; Elisabeth R Mathiesen; Torben Hansen; Dorte M Jensen; Peter Damm Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-06-28 Impact factor: 3.240