Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19764843›Full record

ArticleJournal of women's health (2002)2009

Effect of hospital setting and volume on clinical outcomes in women with gestational and type 2 diabetes mellitus.

W K Nicholson, F Witter, N R Powe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of women's health (2002), 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

W K NicholsonDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland 21287, USA. wnichol@jhmi.edu
F Witter
N R Powe

Funding

JHU-UMD Diabetes Research CenterP30DK079637 · NIDDK · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI WONDISFORD, FREDRIC E. · 2013 to 2017
$9.7M
PATIENT ORIENTED RESEARCH IN KIDNEY DISEASEK24DK002643 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI POWE, NEIL R. · 1999 to 2009
$1.4M
The Role of Inflammation and Parity on GDM and Type 2 DMK23DK067944 · NIDDK · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI NICHOLSON, WANDA K · 2004 to 2008
$671k
NIDDK NIH HHS K23DK067944NIDDK NIH HHS K24DK002643NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK079637
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveEfforts to improve health care outcomes in the United States have led some organizations to recommend specific hospital settings or case volumes for complex medical diagnoses and procedures. But there are few studies of the effect of setting and volume on maternal outcomes, particularly in complicated conditions, such as diabetes. Our objective was to estimate the effect of hospital setting and volume on childbirth morbidity and length of stay in pregnancies complicated by type 2 and gestational diabetes.

methodsWe analyzed Maryland hospital discharge data during 1999-2004. The dependent variables were primary cesarean delivery, episiotomy, a composite variable for severe maternal morbidity, and hospital length of stay. The independent variables were hospital setting (community, non-teaching hospitals, community, teaching hospitals, and academic medical centers) and tertiles of annual hospital diabetes delivery volume. Multivariable regression analysis was used to assess the relation of hospital setting with each outcome, adjusting for hospital volume and maternal case mix.

results5,507 deliveries with type 2 (15%) and gestational (85%) diabetes were analyzed. Primary cesarean delivery rates among women with any diabetes did not vary across settings. After adjustment for volume and patient case mix, the likelihood of severe maternal morbidity was higher among deliveries at academic centers compared to community, non-teaching hospitals (odds ratio [OR], 2.1; 95% confidence interval: 1.0, 4.2). Academic centers had a protective effect (OR, 0.3; 95% CI: 0.2, 0.7) and community teaching hospitals had a borderline protective effect (OR, 0.8; 95% CI: 0.7, 1.0) on episiotomy, compared to community, non-teaching hospitals. Length of stay was greater at academic centers and community, teaching hospitals compared to community, non-teaching hospitals (5.4 days, 3.5 days vs. 2.8 days, respectively). We did not identify an independent association between hospital diabetes volume and clinical outcomes after adjustment for case mix.

conclusionsAmong women with type 2 and gestational diabetes, hospital setting is associated with a higher likelihood of severe maternal morbidity and length of stay, independent of volume. Patient case mix accounts for some of the variation across settings. The volume-outcome relationship found with other complex medical conditions or procedures was not found among diabetic pregnancies. Further investigations are needed to explain variations in outcomes across hospital settings and volumes.

Indexed as

Academic Medical CentersAdultCausalityCesarean SectionComorbidityConfidence IntervalsDelivery, ObstetricDiabetes, GestationalDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2FemaleHealth Facility SizeHospitals, CommunityHospitals, TeachingHumansInfant, NewbornLength of Stay

Identifiers

PMID19764843
PMCPMC2864466

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.