SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2012
Different intensities of glycaemic control for pregnant women with pre-existing diabetes.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Different intensities of glycaemic control for women with gestational diabetes mellitus.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Different insulin types and regimens for pregnant women with pre-existing diabetes.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Different intensities of glycaemic control for pregnant women with pre-existing diabetes.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Different intensities of glycaemic control for women with gestational diabetes mellitus.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Caesarean Delivery Rate Review: An Evidence-Based Analysis.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2015Pooled it
- Autophagy and its link to type II diabetes mellitus.BioMedicine · 2017Article
- Review
- Cost-effectiveness of the New Zealand diabetes in pregnancy guideline screening recommendations.BMJ open · 2015Article
- Diabetes and perinatal mortality in twin pregnancies.PloS one · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe optimal glycaemic control target in pregnant women with pre-existing diabetes is unclear, although there is a clear link between high glucose concentrations and adverse birth outcomes.
objectivesTo assess the effects of different intensities of glycaemic control in pregnant women with pre-existing type 1 or type 2 diabetes. SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 April 2012). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials comparing different glycaemic control targets in pregnant women with pre-existing diabetes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias, and extracted data. MAIN
resultsWe included three trials all in women with type 1 diabetes (223 women and babies), and all with a high risk of bias. Two trials compared very tight (3.33 to 5.0 mmol/L fasting blood glucose (FBG)) with tight-moderate (4.45 to 6.38) glycaemic control targets, with one trial of 22 babies reporting no perinatal deaths or serious perinatal morbidity. In the same trial, there were two birth defects in the very tight and none in the tight-moderate group with no significant differences in caesarean section between groups (risk ratio 0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49 to 1.73). In these two trials glycaemic control was not significantly different between the very tight and tight-moderate groups by the third trimester, although one trial of 22 women found significantly less maternal hypoglycaemia in the tight-moderate group.In a trial of 60 women and babies comparing tight (≤ 5.6 mmol/L FBG); moderate (5.6 to 6.7); and loose (6.7 to 8.9) glycaemic control targets, there were two neonatal deaths in the loose and none in the tight or moderate groups. There were significantly fewer women with pre-eclampsia, fewer caesareans and fewer birthweights greater than 90th centile in the combined tight-moderate compared with the loose group. AUTHORS'
conclusionsIn a very limited body of evidence, few differences in outcomes were seen between very tight and tight-moderate glycaemic control targets in pregnant women with pre-existing type 1 diabetes, including actual glycaemic control achieved. There is evidence of harm (increased pre-eclampsia, caesareans and birthweights greater than 90th centile) for 'loose' control (FBG above 7 mmol/L). Future trials comparing interventions, rather than glycaemic control targets, may be more feasible particularly for pregnant women with type 2 diabetes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.