Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28864965›Full record

ReviewDrugs2017

Pharmacological Management of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus.

Geetha Mukerji, Denice S Feig

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Drugs, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Geetha MukerjiUniversity of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Denice S FeigUniversity of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. d.feig@utoronto.ca.
University of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated with an increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes in the setting of poor glycemic control. The initial management for GDM includes intensive lifestyle modification, which often requires behavioral and nutritional changes to optimize glycemic control. Pharmacotherapy for GDM is initiated when glycemic targets are not met. The rapid-acting bolus analogues aspart and lispro achieve postprandial targets with less hypoglycemia compared to regular insulin, with similar fetal outcomes. The long-acting insulin analogues glargine and detemir appear safe with similar maternal/fetal outcomes compared to NPH. While insulin has been the mainstay therapy for women with GDM to improve glycemic control when lifestyle modifications are insufficient, certain oral antihyperglycemic drugs (OADs) can be considered as alternative treatment options for GDM but continue to be controversial for use as first-line treatment options compared to insulin by many professional bodies. Metformin has good efficacy and short-term safety data but it freely crosses the placenta and long-term safety data are lacking. Glyburide has good efficacy and short-term data but it also crosses the placenta and may be associated with increased rates of large-for-gestational-age (LGA) infants and neonatal hypoglycaemia when compared with insulin. This review aims to give an overview of the pharmacological treatment for women with GDM including some of the known safety profiles of current therapeutic options.

Indexed as

AcarboseBlood GlucoseDiabetes, GestationalFemaleGlyburideHumansHypoglycemiaHypoglycemic AgentsInsulinMetforminPregnancyAcarboseBlood GlucoseGlyburideHypoglycemic AgentsInsulinMetformin

Identifiers

PMID28864965
OpenAlexW2751789708

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.