Diabetes Mellitus Epidemiology Statistics Essay

Exclusively available on Available only on IvyPanda® Written by Human No AI

The researcher focused on determining whether breastfeeding posited any relationship or effect on the handling of Diabetes Mellitus (DM) within the next two-year period after helping a woman with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) deliver a child. Gestational diabetes mellitus has grown as a menace, influencing individuals’ lives due to a lack of glucose tolerance. The topic is relatively important as the illness affects about 8% of all pregnancies in the US. In this instance, women previously affected by GDM illustrated a greater likelihood of contracting DM (x7). The researcher further seeks to discern the effects of lactation and breastfeeding on mothers’ bodies. It is important to consider that postpartum behaviors and lactation evidence higher lipid and glucose absorption and metabolism. These activities and breastfeeding have good metabolic effects that are visible even after a mother weans the child. Therefore, the paper primarily focuses on whether breastfeeding exhibits a connection to DM in women that contracted GDM before delivering a child.

Incidence Rates

Incident rates reported per 1,000 person-months are predicated on the person-time rate calculated from a long-term cohort study. The study entails monitoring and following up with pregnant women from conception until they give birth and their babies are weaned off milk. This is a long-term cohort study that necessitates using a person-time method. In this instance, the researcher follows enrolees for a period while noting new cases of an illness (Krickeberg et al, 2019). This study entails a standard established observation order from the established starting time to an endpoint, in this case, the onset of disease, death, or the study’s end (person-months means persons per month). The value illustrates the total number of people observed annually. Some researchers use it when showcasing the average population of participants in a study during a particular period (CDC, 2018). Nonetheless, it is prudent to note that person-time assumes an illness does not mutate and remains constant during the study period. Using this constancy logic, following 10 people for 1 year is akin to following 1 person for 10 years, a situation that is not often valid.

Evidence Posited by Hazard Ratios

Table 14.14 showcases the intensity of individuals in a group that are lactating after delivery within 6 to 9 weeks. The researcher states the table accounts for hazard ratios that are evident indicating DM risk. The table notes women’s incidences involving DM contraction two years after they give birth. It is crucial to state this value represents women in the study that previously contracted gestational DM. The study indicates that a significant difference exists between women feeding their children exclusively formula versus those focusing only on lactation. In this instance, the results illustrate that lactating mothers that previously contracted GDM are less likely to get DM than their counterparts who provide babies with formula. This difference is evidenced in a gap between 0.72 and 0.43 out of 1. This ratio remains similarly balanced despite accounting for maternal risk factors or postpartum lifestyle, exhibiting differences of 0.64-0.46 and 0.66-0.48, respectively. This variation is due to the production of glucose by mothers, a habit reinforced by lactation while restrained when a mother chooses formula. Therefore, the latter mother is more likely to contract DM than their former counterpart.

The researcher accounts for various variables like maternal risk factors, age, and neonatal outcomes that promote one’s potential to get DM. Another risk factor to consider in this instance is postpartum maternal lifestyle. A long-term study with follow-up would be flawed if the researcher failed to make such considerations due to their significance for the mother’s health within the two years. It is crucial to note these factors play the most critical roles in propagating or limiting DM development, leading to their inclusion as opposed to other environmental and physical factors affecting the mother.

References

CDC. (2018). The Cdc Field Epidemiology Manual. Oxford University Press.

Krickeberg, K., Trong, P. V., & Hanh, P. T. M. (2019). Epidemiology: Key to public health (2nd ed.). Springer.

More related papers Related Essay Examples
Cite This paper
You're welcome to use this sample in your assignment. Be sure to cite it correctly

Reference

IvyPanda. (2023, October 1). Diabetes Mellitus Epidemiology Statistics. https://ivypanda.com/essays/diabetes-mellitus-epidemiology-statistics/

Work Cited

"Diabetes Mellitus Epidemiology Statistics." IvyPanda, 1 Oct. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/diabetes-mellitus-epidemiology-statistics/.

References

IvyPanda. (2023) 'Diabetes Mellitus Epidemiology Statistics'. 1 October.

References

IvyPanda. 2023. "Diabetes Mellitus Epidemiology Statistics." October 1, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/diabetes-mellitus-epidemiology-statistics/.

1. IvyPanda. "Diabetes Mellitus Epidemiology Statistics." October 1, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/diabetes-mellitus-epidemiology-statistics/.


Bibliography


IvyPanda. "Diabetes Mellitus Epidemiology Statistics." October 1, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/diabetes-mellitus-epidemiology-statistics/.

If, for any reason, you believe that this content should not be published on our website, you can request its removal.
Updated:
This academic paper example has been carefully picked, checked and refined by our editorial team.
No AI was involved: only quilified experts contributed.
You are free to use it for the following purposes:
  • To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
  • As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
  • As a template for you assignment
1 / 1