Observational studyMedicine2016
Development of a Screening Tool for Predicting Adverse Outcomes of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Observational study in Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 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, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prediction Models for Maternal and Offspring Short- and Long-Term Outcomes Following Gestational Diabetes: A Systematic Review.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2025Pooled it
- The Unrealised Potential for Predicting Pregnancy Complications in Women with Gestational Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Pooled it
- Prevalence of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in Eastern and Southeastern Asia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of diabetes research · 2018Pooled it
- Trial
- Circulating miR-486-3p as a potential biomarker for the diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus and the prediction of adverse pregnancy outcomes.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Application value of serum S100B combined with glucose metabolism indexes in predicting adverse pregnancy outcomes of patients with severe preeclampsia.Journal of human hypertension · 2024Article
- A retrospective study of supplemental iron intake in singleton pregnancy women with risk of developing gestational diabetes mellitus.Medicine · 2018Observational
- The trends and risk factors to predict adverse outcomes in gestational diabetes mellitus: a 10-year experience from 2006 to 2015 in a single tertiary center.Obstetrics & gynecology science · 2018Article
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is a common disease in pregnancy causing maternal and fetal complications. To prevent these adverse outcomes, optimal screening and diagnostic criteria must be adequate, timely, and efficient. This study suggests a novel approach that is practical, efficient, and patient- and clinician-friendly in predicting adverse outcomes of GDM. The authors conducted a retrospective cohort study via medical record review of patients admitted between March 2001 and April 2013 at the Severance Hospital, Seoul, South Korea. Patients diagnosed by a conventional 2-step method were evaluated according to the presence of adverse outcomes (neonatal hypoglycemia, hyperbilirubinemia, and hyperinsulinemia; admission to the neonatal intensive care unit; large for gestational age; gestational insulin therapy; and gestational hypertension). Of 802 women who had an abnormal 50-g, 1-hour glucose challenge test, 306 were diagnosed with GDM and 496 did not have GDM (false-positive group). In the GDM group, 218 women (71.2%) had adverse outcomes. In contrast, 240 women (48.4%) in the false-positive group had adverse outcomes. Women with adverse outcomes had a significantly higher body mass index (BMI) at entry (P = 0.03) and fasting blood glucose (FBG) (P = 0.03). Our logistic regression model derived from 2 variables, BMI at entry and FBG, predicted GDM adverse outcome with an area under the curve of 0.642, accuracy of 61.3%, sensitivity of 57.2%, and specificity of 66.9% compared with the conventional 2-step method with an area under the curve of 0.610, accuracy of 59.1%, sensitivity of 47.6%, and specificity of 74.4%. Our model performed better in predicting GDM adverse outcomes than the conventional 2-step method using only BMI at entry and FBG. Moreover, our model represents a practical, inexpensive, efficient, reproducible, easy, and patient- and clinician-friendly approach.
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.