News Reader.info

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is best managed via lifestyle changes. We aimed at investigating to which extent women with GDM adhered to dietary

recommendations and to which extent an impact was observed on the glycaemic control compared to women without GDM. SUBJECTS/METHODS Women with overweight/obesity (_n_ = 349) were recruited

in early pregnancy. GDM was diagnosed with a 2-h oral glucose tolerance test in mid-or-early pregnancy (median 25.9 and 14.7 gestational weeks). Dietary assessments included an index of

dietary quality (good ≥ 10 and poor < 10/15 scores) and 3-day food-diaries with nutrient intake calculated and dietary patterns identified. Glucose and insulin concentrations were

analysed from blood samples collected in late pregnancy (after GDM diagnosis). RESULTS Women with GDM (_n_ = 98) followed more often a healthier dietary pattern (62.2%) than women without

GDM (49.0%, _p_ < 0.05), but no difference in good dietary quality was seen (53% vs. 59.8%, _p_ = 0.071). While the majority of women with GDM adhered to some recommendations, 51% to

carbohydrate, 54.1% to total fat and 69.4% to sucrose, only 16.3% adhered to the protein and 4.1% to the fibre intake recommendations. Women with GDM had lower adherence to protein, total

fat and fibre recommendations but higher adherence to that of sucrose than women without GDM (_p_ < 0.05). A good dietary quality was associated with lower insulin and HOMA2-IR values

(_p_ < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS Adherence to dietary recommendations, particularly fibre and protein intake, is unsatisfactory in women with GDM. Overall dietary quality is related to better

control of glucose metabolism proposing a target for dietary counselling. SIMILAR CONTENT BEING VIEWED BY OTHERS DIETARY INSULIN LOAD AND INDEX IN RELATION TO INCIDENT GESTATIONAL DIABETES

MELLITUS: A PROSPECTIVE COHORT STUDY Article Open access 30 December 2024 THE CONSUMPTION OF LOW-CALORIE SWEETENER CONTAINING FOODS DURING PREGNANCY: RESULTS FROM THE ROLO STUDY Article Open

access 26 May 2021 MATERNAL PRE-PREGNANCY OVERWEIGHT AND GESTATIONAL DIABETES AND DIETARY INTAKES AMONG YOUNG ADULT OFFSPRING Article Open access 23 July 2020 INTRODUCTION Gestational

diabetes mellitus (GDM) is a common disorder of glucose metabolism that is detected for the first time in pregnancy; its global prevalence is estimated to be 15.8% [1, 2]. The main risk

factors for the disease are overweight and obesity (body mass index, BMI 25–29.9 kg/m2 and ≥30 kg/m2), and in Finland in 2021, almost 40% of pregnant women were with overweight [3]. GDM

predisposes women to complications for both mother and child, including preeclampsia, complications at delivery, inclusive of the need for caesarean section, shoulder dystocia, physical

birth trauma and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit, and later in life to an increased risk for type 2 diabetes [4,5,6,7]. Children born to women with GDM have an increased risk

of suffering health conditions like obesity, impaired glucose tolerance and diabetes [8]. Due to the multiple adverse impacts on health, the management of GDM aims primarily to control

glucose metabolism. Lifestyle modifications, including diet and physical activity are the first steps in the management of GDM. It is estimated that the majority, 70–85%, of the cases can be

controlled with these changes alone [9], whilst the rest will need medication with insulin or metformin to keep glucose levels at recommended levels [9]. Dietary counselling focuses on the

frequency of eating, limiting the intake of carbohydrates and controlling weight gain by restricting energy intake [2, 10]. An overall good nutritional quality of the consumed foods should

be emphasised, focusing on the intake of vegetables, fruits, whole-grains, low-fat dairy-products and fish [10]. Maternal glucose control is largely dependent on adherence to the guidelines

set for the management of GDM. However, there is a lack of evidence on how well pregnant women actually adhere to these recommendations. It has been claimed that adherence to lifestyle

counselling can be challenging for many reasons e.g. tiredness, insufficient time and lack of knowledge or support [11, 12]. On the other hand, the desire to give birth to a healthy baby has

been found to be a major factor motivating pregnant women with overweight or obesity to adopt a healthy lifestyle [12]. Our primary aim was to investigate the adherence to the dietary

recommendations and nutrient intake of women with GDM and to compare these to the respective information obtained from the women without GDM. Secondly, we studied separately women with GDM

who were treated by diet only and women who required medication to control glucose status. Third, we investigated the association of the diet with glycaemic control in women with or without

GDM. We chose to study women with overweight and obesity as they are an at-risk population considering the onset of GDM as well as potential health complications occurring during pregnancy.

METHODS The data for this study were collected in a longitudinal, mother-child dietary-intervention trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01922791); its recruitment took place between October 2013

and July 2017, reported in detail previously [13]. The study was carried out according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki; the study protocol was approved by the Ethics

Committee of the Hospital District of Southwest Finland and an informed consent was collected from all the participants. We recruited healthy pregnant women (_n_ = 439) with inclusion

criteria of <18 gestational weeks (GW), self-reported pre-pregnancy BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2 and singleton pregnancy. GDM was diagnosed in mid-pregnancy (median 25.9, IQR = 25.0–27.4 GW) or in

early pregnancy (high-risk women, _n_ = 26) (median 14.7, IQR = 12.9–16.0 GW) [14]. Dietary assessments and blood sampling (glucose and insulin concentrations) were conducted at mean 35.2

(SD = 0.97) GW, i.e. after the GDM diagnosis. Gestational weight gain during the whole pregnancy was defined as the last measured weight minus the self-reported pre-pregnancy weight. Women’s

clinical characteristics were collected by questionnaires and interviews at baseline. Physical activity was assessed by a questionnaire [15] and a metabolic equivalent index for physical

activity (MET-index, h/wk) was calculated and categorised into three groups (light, moderate, vigorous) [16]. No dietary counselling was given during the study visits, but all pregnant

women, regardless of the GDM status attend communal maternity clinics monthly, and during the last trimester of pregnancy on a weekly basis. These visits include diet counselling provided by

trained public health nurses in addition to maternal and foetal health check-ups. Pregnant women, particularly women with obesity, are advised to follow dietary recommendations: increase

their consumption of vegetables, fruits and berries, choose whole grain cereal products, low-fat dairy products and meat products with a preference towards lean meat including poultry and

fish and to choose spreads and salad dressing with unsaturated fatty acids. GDM DIAGNOSIS, BLOOD SAMPLING AND ANALYSES GDM diagnosis was based on a 2-h 75-g oral glucose tolerance test

(cut-off values 0 h ≥ 5.3, 1 h ≥ 10.0, 2 h ≥ 8.6 mmol/L) according to the Finnish Current Care Guidelines [14]. The women diagnosed with GDM were treated in maternity clinics, which are part

of the Finnish public health system [17]. In Finland, dietary treatment of GDM follows nutritional recommendations for pregnancy with administration of metformin and/or insulin if needed to

help control blood glucose-levels [14]. Fasting (>9 h) blood glucose levels were measured by a hexokinase-based enzymatic method and serum insulin by immunoelectrochemiluminometry in a

certified laboratory (TYKSLAB, Hospital District of Southwest Finland). Insulin resistance was determined by calculating the HOMA (HOMA2-IR) [18]. DIETARY INTAKE Dietary data were collected

from three-day food diaries (two weekdays and one weekend day). Participants were given oral and written instructions on how to complete the food diary with the accuracy being checked with

the help of an illustrated portion booklet. The intake of energy, energy-yielding nutrients, vitamins and minerals was calculated with computerised software AivoDiet 2.0.2.3 (Aivo, Turku,

Finland). The intake from food supplements was recorded from food diaries and added to the dietary intake (total intake). Adherence to the dietary recommendations was based on the Finnish

recommendations [19] as well as from the 2013 care guidelines for treatment of gestational diabetes as the data were collected at that time. The recommended values are presented in result

tables. Dietary patterns were identified based on the consumption of food groups calculated from food diaries as described previously [20]. Two dietary patterns were identified; these were

designated as either healthier or unhealthier patterns. The healthier pattern was characterised by a high consumption of vegetables, rye bread, fruits, nuts, pasta and rice; the unhealthier

pattern by high intake of sugary beverages, multigrain/wheat bread, sweets, and pastries. The quality of the diet was evaluated by a validated index of the diet quality (IDQ) questionnaire

[21] which consists of 18 questions investigating the amount and frequency of consumption of certain food products and beverages (whole-grain bread, saturated/unsaturated fatty acids, dairy

products, vegetables, fruits, berries, sugar-containing drinks and sweets). Since its maximum points were 15, after scoring the questions, the quality of diet was considered to be good ( ≥ 

10/15) or poor (<10/15) [21]. The mean length of the fasting time, i.e. time between the last meal in the evening and the first meal in the morning and the number of meals per day were

calculated from the food diaries [20]. Meals were categorised as food-containing meals or beverage meals (beverages without calories were not considered as meals). STATISTICAL ANALYSES The

normality of the data was assessed by skewness-values (<1). Mean (standard deviation) were reported for normally distributed variables and median (interquartile range) for values not

normally distributed. Independent Samples T-test was used when comparing between two groups for normally distributed variables, otherwise we applied Mann-Whitney U-test. Categorical

variables were reported as frequency (%), with Chi Square test or Fisher’s Exact Test being used to detect associations. General linear models were performed to investigate the associations

between GDM-status (without vs. with GDM or diet vs. medicine treated GDM), dietary quality (good vs. poor), dietary patterns (healthier vs. unhealthy) and insulin/glucose concentrations or

nutrient intake. Logistic regression models were applied to examine if there were associations between GDM-status (without vs. with GDM, diet vs. medicine treated GDM, without GDM vs.

diet-treated GDM) and adherence to recommendations, dietary patterns and dietary quality. The analyses were adjusted based on group differences in the participants’ characteristics: (1)

women without vs. women with GDM, maternal education, previous GDM diagnosis, pre-pregnancy BMI, (2) without GDM vs. diet-treated GDM, previous GDM diagnosis and pre-pregnancy BMI, (3)

dietary quality (good vs. poor), maternal education level and age. In addition, the original trial intervention-groups (fish oil and/or probiotics or placebo) were included in these models.

Gestational weight gain was not included in the models to avoid multicollinearity problems as it correlated with pre-pregnancy BMI (_r_ = −0.25, _p_ < 0.001). GW at delivery was not

included as it did not affect the outcomes. Prior to the adjusted analysis, variables that were not normally distributed were natural-log transformed. Statistical analyses were conducted

using IBM SPSS 27.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). _P_-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS CLINICAL CHARACTERISTICS Almost every third woman was diagnosed with

GDM, with the majority (80%) being treated with diet only, whilst the remaining 20% received additionally either metformin (12%), insulin (3.1%) or both (5.1%). The women with GDM had a

higher pre-pregnancy BMI and a lower education level when compared to women without GDM (Table 1). No differences in the clinical characteristics were detected between women treated with

diet alone or women supplemented with medicine (Table S1). The clinical characteristics according to women’s dietary quality and dietary pattern are shown in the supplementary table (Table

S2). DIETARY PATTERNS, DIETARY QUALITY AND MEAL FREQUENCY A higher proportion of women with GDM, 62.2%, adhered to a healthier dietary pattern in comparison to the women without GDM (49.0%,

_p_ = 0.032) (Table 2). When one considers the treatment modality for GDM, a higher proportion of women treated with medicine (85%) were following a healthier dietary pattern when compared

to women treated with diet only (56.4%, _p_ = 0.021) (Table 2). There were no statistically significant differences between women with GDM (59.8%) and women without GDM (53.0%, _p_ = 0.280)

or between women with GDM treated with diet only (57.1%) and supplemented with medicine (70.0%, _p_ = 0.321) with respect to the numbers consuming a good quality diet (Table 2). In women

with GDM, the mean fasting time was 11.7 (1.6) hours, which did not differ from that of women without GDM (11.9 (1.9)), _p_ = 0.45. The women with GDM had a mean 5.2 (1.0) meals/day,

including beverage meals, while the corresponding value in women without GDM was 5.4 (1.1) (_p_ = 0.21). The result remained unchanged, when considering only the meals containing food (data

not shown). ADHERENCE TO DIETARY RECOMMENDATIONS AND INTAKE OF NUTRIENTS ENERGY AND ENERGY-YIELDING NUTRIENTS Approximately half of the women with GDM met the recommendations with respect to

the intake of carbohydrate and total fat, even more, 69.4%, for sucrose intake, whilst less than one out of every five met the criterion for adequate protein intake (Table 3). Furthermore,

only a small proportion (4.1%) adhered to the recommendation for fibre intake. When investigating whether the adherence to dietary recommendations differed between women with and without GDM

(Table 3), we observed that a lower proportion of women with GDM met the recommendations for protein, total fat, and fibre intake than the women without GDM. In contrast, a higher

proportion of women with GDM adhered to the sucrose recommendation when compared to women without GDM (Table 3). No differences were detected according to women’s treatment modality for GDM

(Table S3). In both groups, the adherence to fibre recommendation was extremely low (3.8% and 5.0% in diet only and medicine groups, respectively). When we examined nutrient intake, women

with GDM had a lower intake of energy, carbohydrates, and sucrose when compared to non-GDM women (Table 3). When the intake was assessed as a percentage of energy intake, it was evident that

the women with GDM were consuming higher proportions of fat and protein, but lower proportions of carbohydrates and sucrose (Table 3). We also compared the women with GDM treated with diet

alone with women who received additionally medication (Table S3); there were only two differences observed i.e. the women with GDM treated with diet (1) had a lower intake of fibre

(non-significant in the adjusted model) and (2) higher intake of sucrose. VITAMINS AND MINERALS A lower proportion of women with GDM met the recommendation for calcium intake (intake from

diet and diet+supplements) when compared to women without GDM (non-significant in the adjusted model, Table 4). When investigating the women according to the treatment modality for GDM, the

women treated with medication had a higher adherence to the pyridoxine recommendation than women treated with diet alone (non-significant in the adjusted model, Table S4). We detected some

differences when comparing the intake of vitamins between women with and without GDM; for example, the intake of thiamine (mg/MJ), niacin (E%), vitamin E (mg/MJ) and folate (ug/MJ) was

higher but that of riboflavin (mg) was lower in women with GDM than in the women without GDM (see details in Table 4). In the comparison of the mineral intake of women with GDM vs. without

GDM, it seemed that the intake of magnesium (mg/MJ), iron (mg/MJ), zinc (mg/MJ), and selenium (mg/MJ) was higher but the intake of calcium (mg), manganese (mg), and chromium (ug) was lower

(see details in Table 4). No differences were evident in the comparison of women treated with diet only and women supplemented with medicine (Table S4). GLYCAEMIC CONTROL When investigating

the women’s glycaemic control (mean 35.2 GW), we found that women with GDM who were treated with diet only, had a higher fasting glucose value than women without GDM (_p_ < 0.001) (Table

5). We also evaluated whether diet affected the glycaemic control; the women with a good dietary quality in both the women without GDM and the GDM treated with diet only (i.e. those

receiving insulin or metformin were excluded from this analysis) had lower insulin and HOMA2-IR values when compared to women with a poor dietary quality (Table 5). Dietary patterns were not

related to the glucose metabolism values. As per the diagnosis, women without GDM presented with better glycaemic control compared to women with GDM regardless of the diet quality or diet

pattern (Table S5). DISCUSSION In this clinical study, we found that there is room for improvements in the dietary intake of all pregnant women but especially women with GDM; the adherence

to the fibre recommendation was at a low level, but also more attention should be paid to the adherence to the carbohydrate, total fat, protein, and energy recommendations. However, when

assessing the adherence to dietary pattern, most women with GDM did consume a healthy diet, in fact even more frequently than non-GDM women. A good overall dietary quality was related with

better glycaemic control, namely lower insulin and HOMA2-IR values, and this highlights the opportunity for improving their health by dietary therapy. We observed that the intake of

carbohydrates as a percentage of energy was too low compared to dietary recommendations in almost half of the women with GDM. Furthermore, the adherence to the fibre recommendation in these

women was at a low level, as less than 5% met the recommended criterion. It is likely that when the women with GDM limit their carbohydrate intake, fibre intake dramatically decreases at the

same time. This is worrying as fibre has an important role in glycaemic control [22]. It is noteworthy that at the time the study was conducted the dietary recommendation for women with GDM

differed from recommendation for women without GDM such that on average less energy should be derived from carbohydrates (40–50 E% vs. 45–60 E%). The new recommendations were issued in

2024, and now women with GDM are advised to follow essentially the general dietary recommendations for pregnant women (including similar proportions of the energy yielding nutrients) [23].

Clearly, the emphasis should be placed on motivating the women to undertake these lifestyle changes. We also observed that approximately half of the women did not meet the recommendation for

total fat intake and even more (about 84%) for protein intake. As fat is an energy-dense nutrient, it is important to guide women but especially women with overweight or obesity, to use

low-fat products as it may affect the weight-gain during pregnancy [24, 25]. An excess weight-gain in turn has been shown to contribute to detrimental health effects for both the mother and

the foetus [26, 27]. Considering diet quality or diet pattern we did not observe differences between women with overweight or obesity. The adherence of women with GDM to the dietary

recommendations has been investigated in only a few studies; in one publication from New Zealand, women with GDM (_n_ = 313) [28] exhibited poor adherence to the recommendations regarding

the intake of saturated fatty acids and whole-grains i.e. similar findings as described here [25]. Another study (_n_ = 239, South-Africa) found that only 19.1% of women with GDM received

enough fibre from the diet, although that proportion was still higher than in our study [29]. Evidently, more investigations are needed to assess how well women with GDM adhere to dietary

recommendations. We also examined whether the dietary intake would be better in women with GDM than in women without GDM: women with GDM had a lower adherence to the protein, fat, and fibre

recommendations but a higher adherence to the recommendation for sucrose. A restriction of the consumption of carbohydrates, especially sugary products is a well-known way to manage blood

glucose levels, which could explain the relatively good compliance with the sucrose recommendation (69.4%). Unfortunately, the downside is that the restriction of carbohydrate intake

typically resulted in a reduced fibre intake. In summary, there is a need to reassess the quality of carbohydrate sources in the diet and how this affects the fibre intake during dietary

counselling of these women in maternal health clinics. Here, 62.2% of all women with GDM and 85% of women treated with medicine followed a healthy dietary pattern. Our findings suggest that

dietary counselling in the maternal health clinics to women with GDM, and particularly women being treated with some form of medication is effective to some extent. We have also demonstrated

previously that the women who did not develop GDM had a higher adherence to a healthier dietary pattern in early pregnancy when compared to women who developed GDM [20]. On the other hand,

the diet of almost every second woman with GDM was not considered to be “healthy”, and not nearly all women met the dietary recommendations. The composition of the diet is known to affect

glucose metabolism, and in fact we observed that women with a good dietary quality, defined by an index for dietary quality [21], had better insulin and HOMA2-IR values when compared to

women whose dietary quality was rated as poor. This is in line with an American study (_n_ = 1220) reporting better glycaemic control in women with GDM who had a higher dietary quality

measured by the Healthy Eating Index 2010 [30]. This overall diet approach can form a foundation for dietary counselling as good dietary quality is defined as including a high consumption of

whole-grains, vegetables, fruits and berries, low-fat dairy products, and unsaturated fatty acids. Interestingly, our results indicate that the adherence of women with GDM to dietary

guidelines was not sufficient to modulate blood glucose values to the same level as observed in women without GDM, probably also reflecting pancreatic insufficiency and intensified insulin

resistance in women with GDM. The strength of our study is its prospective design. We assessed each mother’s dietary intake in detail (intake of energy, energy-yielding nutrients, vitamins

and minerals, eating frequency, dietary patterns) from food diaries and also used a validated index to assess the dietary quality [21]. We took possible confounding factors into

consideration in our statistical analyses. One limitation is the small number of GDM women treated with some form of medicine (_n_ = 20). Another limitation is the usage of dietary patterns,

which are data-based and thus depend on the study population. Further, as diet was assessed after the GDM diagnosis, it is possible that the women misreported the intake either consciously

or unconsciously. Evidently, not all women with GDM are adhering to dietary recommendations and thus dietary counselling of this group of women should be intensified especially with respect

to the intake of fibre, protein and fat, and this should be emphasised by clinicians. There seems to be a need to develop novel means for dietary counselling, targeted particularly to women

at high risk for pregnancy complications e.g. due to overweight/obesity, to improve dietary intake and consequently glycaemic control. DATA AVAILABILITY The datasets analysed during the

current study are not publicly available as these datasets contain information that could compromise the privacy and consent from the participants. REFERENCES * Wang H, Li N, Chivese T,

Werfalli M, Sun H, Yuen L, et al. IDF Diabetes Atlas: Estimation of global and regional gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence for 2021 by international association of diabetes in

pregnancy study group’s criteria. Diabetes Res Clin Pr. 2022;183:109050. Article  Google Scholar  * McIntyre HD, Catalano P, Zhang C, Desoye G, Mathiesen ER, Damm P. Gestational diabetes

mellitus. Nat Rev Dis Prim. 2019;5:1–19. Google Scholar  * Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare. Perinatal statistics – parturients, deliveries and newborns 2021. Statistical Report

41/2022, 28.11.2022. Official Statistics of Finland, Perinatal statistics. 2021. * Diaz-Santana MV, O’brien KM, Park YMM, Sandler DP, Weinberg CR. Persistence of risk for Type 2 diabetes

after gestational diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care. 2022;45:864. Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome (HAPO) study: preeclampsia. Am

J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;202:255.e1-255.e7. * Farrar D, Simmonds M, Bryant M, Sheldon TA, Tuffnell D, Golder S, et al. Hyperglycaemia and risk of adverse perinatal outcomes: systematic review

and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2016;354. https://doi.org/10.1136/BMJ.I4694. * Lowe WL, Scholtens DM, Lowe LP, Kuang A, Nodzenski M, Talbot O, et al. Association of gestational diabetes with

maternal disorders of glucose metabolism and childhood adiposity. JAMA. 2018;320:1005–16. Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Damm P, Houshmand-Oeregaard A, Kelstrup L,

Lauenborg J, Mathiesen ER, Clausen TD. Gestational diabetes mellitus and long-term consequences for mother and offspring: a view from Denmark. Diabetologia. 2016;59:1396–9. Article  CAS 

PubMed  Google Scholar  * Kelley KW, Carroll DG, Meyer A. A review of current treatment strategies for gestational diabetes mellitus. Drugs Context. 2015;4.

https://doi.org/10.7573/dic.212282. * Hod M, Kapur A, Sacks DA, Hadar E, Agarwal M, Di Renzo GC, et al. The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) Initiative on

gestational diabetes mellitus: A pragmatic guide for diagnosis, management, and care#. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2015;131:S173–S211. Article  Google Scholar  * Sui Z, Turnbull D, Dodd J.

Enablers of and barriers to making healthy change during pregnancy in overweight and obese women. Aust Med J. 2013;6:565–77. Google Scholar  * Jelsma JGM, Van Leeuwen KM, Oostdam N, Bunn C,

Simmons D, Desoye G, et al. Beliefs, barriers, and preferences of European overweight women to adopt a healthier lifestyle in pregnancy to minimize risk of developing gestational diabetes

mellitus: an explorative study. J Pregnancy. 2016;2016. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/3435791. * Pellonperä O, Mokkala K, Houttu N, Vahlberg T, Koivuniemi E, Tertti K, et al. Efficacy of Fish

Oil and/or Probiotic Intervention on the Incidence of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in an At-Risk Group of Overweight and Obese Women: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind

Clinical Trial. Diabetes Care. 2019;42:1009–17. Article  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Gestational diabetes mellitus. Current Care Guideline. Working Group Set by the Finnish Medical Society

Duodecim and The Finnish Gynecological Association. Helsinki: The Finnish Medical Society Duodecim, 2022. https://www.kaypahoito.fi/hoi50068#K1 (accessed 28 Aug 2023). * Mansikkaniemi K,

Juonala M, Taimela S, Hirvensalo M, Telama R, Huupponen R, et al. Cross-sectional associations between physical activity and selected coronary heart disease risk factors in young adults. The

Cardiovascular Risk in Young Finns Study. Ann Med. 2012;44:733–44. Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Pahkala K, Heinonen OJ, Simell O, Viikari JSA, Rönnemaa T, Niinikoski H, et al.

Association of physical activity with vascular endothelial function and intima-media thickness. Circulation. 2011;124:1956–63. Article  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Maternity and child health

clinics - Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. https://stm.fi/en/maternity-and-child-health-clinics (accessed 30 Jul 2021). * Wallace TM, Levy JC, Matthews DR. Use and abuse of HOMA

modeling. Diabetes Care. 2004;27:1487–95. Article  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare. Eat together - eating recommendations for families with children. 2019.

https://www.julkari.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/137459/URN_ISBN_978-952-343-254-3.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y (accessed 21 Mar 2023). * Pajunen L, Korkalo L, Koivuniemi E, Houttu N,

Pellonperä O, Mokkala K, et al. A healthy dietary pattern with a low inflammatory potential reduces the risk of gestational diabetes mellitus. Eur J Nutr. 2022;61:1477–90. Article  CAS 

PubMed  Google Scholar  * Leppälä J, Lagström H, Kaljonen A, Laitinen K. Construction and evaluation of a self-contained index for assessment of diet quality. Scand J Public Health.

2010;38:794–802. Article  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Reynolds AN, Akerman AP, Mann J. Dietary fibre and whole grains in diabetes management: Systematic review and meta-analyses. PLoS Med.

2020;17:e1003053. Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Gestational diabetes mellitus. Current Care Guideline. Working Group Set by the Finnish Medical Society Duodecim, The

Medical Advisory Board of the Finnish Diabetes Association and The Finnish Gynecological Association. Helsinki: The Finnish Medical Society Duodecim, 2024. https://www.kaypahoito.fi/hoi50068

(accessed 7 Apr 2024). * Pellonperä O, Koivuniemi E, Vahlberg T, Mokkala K, Tertti K, Rönnemaa T, et al. Dietary quality influences body composition in overweight and obese pregnant women.

Clin Nutr. 2019;38:1613–9. Article  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Rugină C, Mărginean CO, Meliţ LE, Giga DV, Modi V, Mărginean C. Relationships between excessive gestational weight gain and

energy and macronutrient intake in pregnant women. J Int Med Res. 2020;48:1–12. Article  Google Scholar  * Yang W, Han F, Gao X, Chen Y, Ji L, Cai X. Relationship between gestational weight

gain and pregnancy complications or delivery outcome. Sci Rep. 2017;7:1–9. Google Scholar  * Goławski K, Giermaziak W, Ciebiera M, Wojtyła C. Excessive gestational weight gain and pregnancy

outcomes. J Clin Med. 2023;12:3211. Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Mustafa S, Harding J, Wall C, Crowther C. Sociodemographic factors associated with adherence to dietary

guidelines in women with gestational diabetes: a cohort study. Nutrients. 2021;13:1884. Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Krige SM, Booley S, Levitt NS, Chivese T,

Murphy K, Harbron J. Dietary intake and beliefs of pregnant women with gestational diabetes in Cape Town, South Africa. Nutrients. 2018;10:1183. Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google

Scholar  * Gadgil MD, Ehrlich SF, Zhu Y, Brown SD, Hedderson MM, Crites Y, et al. Dietary quality and glycemic control among women with gestational diabetes mellitus. J Women’s Health.

2019;28:178. Article  Google Scholar  Download references ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We thank Dr Ewen MacDonald for the English language revision. FUNDING The clinical trial implementation was

supported by the Academy of Finland (#258606), State research funding for university-level health research of the Turku University Hospital Expert Responsibility Area, the Diabetes Research

Foundation, the Juho Vainio Foundation, and the Päivikki and Sakari Sohlberg Foundation. Open Access funding provided by University of Turku (including Turku University Central Hospital).

AUTHOR INFORMATION AUTHORS AND AFFILIATIONS * Integrative Physiology and Pharmacology Unit, Institute of Biomedicine, University of Turku, 20520, Turku, Finland Lotta Saros & Kirsi

Laitinen * Department of Biostatistics, University of Turku and Turku University Hospital, 20520, Turku, Finland Tero Vahlberg * Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Turku

and Turku University Hospital, 20520, Turku, Finland Outi Pellonperä & Kristiina Tertti * Nutrition and Food Research Center, University of Turku, 20520, Turku, Finland Kirsi Laitinen

Authors * Lotta Saros View author publications You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar * Tero Vahlberg View author publications You can also search for this author

inPubMed Google Scholar * Outi Pellonperä View author publications You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar * Kristiina Tertti View author publications You can also search

for this author inPubMed Google Scholar * Kirsi Laitinen View author publications You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar CONTRIBUTIONS KL devised the original clinical

study, directed the project, and acquired the financial support for the study. LS conducted the statistical analyses with the help of TV. OP contributed to data acquisition. LS, KL, KT and

OP interpreted the results. LS wrote the original draft of the paper with the help from KL. KL, KT, OP and TV commented on the paper. All authors have read and approved the final version of

the paper. CORRESPONDING AUTHOR Correspondence to Lotta Saros. ETHICS DECLARATIONS COMPETING INTERESTS The authors declare no competing interests. ETHICAL APPROVAL The study was carried out

according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki and the study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Hospital District of Southwest Finland. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

PUBLISHER’S NOTE Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION SUPPLEMENT TABLES RIGHTS AND

PERMISSIONS OPEN ACCESS This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any

medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The

images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not

included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly

from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. Reprints and permissions ABOUT THIS ARTICLE CITE THIS ARTICLE Saros, L.,

Vahlberg, T., Pellonperä, O. _et al._ Diet intake and adherence to recommendations in women with gestational diabetes mellitus. _Eur J Clin Nutr_ (2025).

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41430-025-01596-z Download citation * Received: 11 October 2023 * Revised: 08 February 2025 * Accepted: 07 March 2025 * Published: 19 March 2025 * DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41430-025-01596-z SHARE THIS ARTICLE Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content: Get shareable link Sorry, a shareable link is not

currently available for this article. Copy to clipboard Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative