Observational studyClinical chemistry2016
Impact of Implementing Preanalytical Laboratory Standards on the Diagnosis of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Prospective Observational Study.
Observational study in Clinical chemistry, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 48 citations in OpenAlex.
- Response to letter regarding 'impact of time from blood specimens collection to centrifugation on the diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus'.Annals of medicine · 2026Article
- The role of continuous glucose monitoring for diagnosis of gestational diabetes: exploring the potential.BMC medicine · 2026Review
- Fasting Metabolite Panel for OGTT-Free Diagnosis of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Machine Learning Approach Validated in Dual Cohorts.Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy · 2026Article
- Impact of time from blood specimens collection to centrifugation on the diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus.Diabetes care · 2023Review
- Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus.Clinical chemistry · 2023Article
- A Clinical Update on Gestational Diabetes Mellitus.Endocrine reviews · 2022Article
- Glycated Albumin: Added Value or Redundancy in Diabetes Care?Clinical chemistry · 2022Article
- Estimated Treatment Effects of Tight Glycaemic Targets in Mild Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Multiple Cut-Off Regression Discontinuity Study Design.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Diagnostic testing for gestational diabetes mellitus during the COVID-19 pandemic: an opportunity to revisit Glucose-Based testing.Internal medicine journal · 2020Article
- Preanalytical issues related to routine and diagnostic glucose tests: Results from a survey in Spain.Biochemia medica · 2020Article
- Diagnosis of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Will Be Flawed until We Can Measure Glucose.Clinical chemistry · 2020Article
- Real-World Gestational Diabetes Screening: Problems with the Oral Glucose Tolerance Test in Rural and Remote Australia.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- The impact of differences in plasma glucose between glucose oxidase and hexokinase methods on estimated gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence.Scientific reports · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on byIn Reply.2016
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes, but risk is reduced with identification and early treatment. Glucose measurements are affected by preanalytical sample handling, such as temperature of storage, phlebotomy-analysis interval, and use of a glycolysis inhibitor. We evaluated glucose concentrations and the incidence of GDM after strict implementation of the American Diabetes Association (ADA) preanalytical guidelines, compared with usual hospital conditions.
methodsWomen screened selectively for GDM at 24-32 weeks' gestation were recruited at their convenience before a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test. Paired samples were taken: the first sample followed ADA recommendations and was transferred to the laboratory on an iced slurry for immediate separation and analysis (research conditions), and the second sample was not placed on ice and was transferred according to hospital practice (usual conditions).
resultsOf samples from 155 women, the mean fasting, 1-h, and 2-h results were 90.0 (12.6) mg/dL [5.0 (0.7) mmol/L], 142.2 (43.2) mg/dL [7.9 (2.4) mmol/L], and 102.6 (32.4) mg/dL [5.7 (1.8) mmol/L], respectively, under research conditions, and 81 (12.6) mg/dL [4.5 (0.7) mmol/L], 133.2 (41.4) mg/dL [7.4 (2.3) mmol/L], and 99 (32.4) mg/dL [5.5 (1.8) mmol/L] under usual conditions (all P < 0.0001). GDM was diagnosed in 38.1% (n = 59) under research conditions and 14.2% (n = 22) under usual conditions (P < 0.0001). The phlebotomy-analysis interval for the fasting, 1-h, and 2-h samples was 20 (9), 17 (10), and 17 (9) min under research conditions and 162 (19), 95 (23), and 32 (19) min under usual conditions (all P < 0.0001). All cases of GDM were diagnosed on fasting or 1-h samples; the 2-h test diagnosed no additional cases.
conclusionsImplementation of ADA preanalytical glucose sample handling recommendations resulted in higher mean glucose concentrations and 2.7-fold increased detection of GDM compared with usual hospital practices.
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.