Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29582160›Full record

SynthesisActa diabetologica2018

Screening and diagnosis of gestational diabetes in India: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Katherine T Li, Shilpa Naik, Mallika Alexander, Jyoti S Mathad

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Acta diabetologica, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 85 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Prediction of pre-eclampsia in diabetic pregnant women.The Indian journal of medical research · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Evolution of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus across Continents in 21st Century.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Screening for gestational diabetes, Ahmedabad, India.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2022
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Katherine T LiWeill Cornell Medical College, 1300 York Ave, New York, NY, 10065, USA. ktl2002@med.cornell.edu.
Shilpa NaikDepartment of OB-GYN, Byramjee Jeejeebhoy Government Medical College, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Mallika AlexanderJohns Hopkins University Clinical Trials Unit, Byramjee Jeejeebhoy Government Medical College, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
Jyoti S MathadDepartments of Medicine and OB-GYN, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Cornell University · USGovernment Medical College · INGovernment Medical College · IN

Funding

Effect of pregnancy and HIV on the development of tuberculosisK23AI129854 · NIAID · WEILL MEDICAL COLL OF CORNELL UNIV · PI MATHAD, JYOTI S · 2017 to 2021
$1.0M
NIAID NIH HHS K23 AI129854
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsAlthough diabetes is rapidly increasing in India, there is no national consensus on best practices for screening, diagnosis, and management of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). The goal of this study was to systematically review the literature for studies reporting the prevalence and screening and diagnostic methods for gestational diabetes in India.

methodsWe searched MEDLINE, Embase, and POPLINE for studies on screening for GDM in India. We included English-language full reports and conference abstracts of cross-sectional studies, prospective, and retrospective cohorts that reported the screening method and prevalence of GDM. We performed descriptive analysis on all studies and meta-analysis, meta-regression, and subgroup meta-analysis on studies with medium or low risk of bias.

resultsWe included 64 studies reporting 90 prevalence estimates. Prevalence estimates ranged from 0 to 41.9%. Subset meta-analyses showed that the IADPSG diagnostic criteria found significantly more GDM cases (prevalence = 19.19% [15.5, 23.6], p < 0.05) than the WHO 1999 criteria (10.13% [8.17, 12.50]) and DIPSI criteria (7.37% [5.2, 10.16]). Studies that compared the IADPSG and WHO 1999 criteria showed poor positive agreement (33-79%). Studies specifying time of GDM diagnosis showed that patients (11-60%) develop GDM as early as the first trimester, but many GDM cases (16-40%) are missed if screened only at first visit.

conclusionsIn India, prevalence estimates of GDM vary substantially by diagnostic criteria. When evaluating screening and diagnostic criteria for GDM, providers should consider their patients' needs and correlate screening criteria with pregnancy outcomes.

Indexed as

Mass ScreeningPrenatal DiagnosisAdultDiabetes, GestationalFemaleGlucose Tolerance TestHumansIndiaPregnancyPregnancy OutcomePrevalenceGestational diabetesIndiaPregnancyScreening

Identifiers

PMID29582160
PMCPMC5999405
OpenAlexW2791703084

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.