ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2018
Clinical Implications of the NICE 2015 Criteria for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Screening pregnant women in a high-risk population with WHO-2013 or NICE diagnostic criteria does not affect the prevalence of gestational diabetes.Scientific reports · 2021Trial
- Placental small extracellular vesicles from normal pregnancy and gestational diabetes increase insulin gene transcription and content in β cells.Clinical science (London, England : 1979) · 2024Article
- Digital Health and Machine Learning Technologies for Blood Glucose Monitoring and Management of Gestational Diabetes.IEEE reviews in biomedical engineering · 2024Review
- Are maternal serum subfatin levels altered in women with one abnormal glucose tolerance test value?Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2024Article
- Maternal Obesity, Gestational Diabetes, and Fetal Macrosomia: An Incidental or a Mechanistic Relationship?Maternal-fetal medicine (Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.) · 2023Article
- Continuous glucose monitoring system profile of women diagnosed as gestational diabetes mellitus by International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups criteria and labeled as normoglycemic by alternate criteria in early pregnancy.Journal of diabetes investigation · 2022Article
- Comparing IADPSG and NICE Diagnostic Criteria for GDM in Predicting Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes.Diabetes care · 2022Article
- GLU: a software package for analysing continuously measured glucose levels in epidemiology.International journal of epidemiology · 2020Article
- Article
- Review of the Screening Guidelines for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: How to Choose Wisely.Indian journal of community medicine : official publication of Indian Association of Preventive & Social MedicineReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn response to concerns that the International Association of Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Group (IADPSG) criteria labeled too many women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) without evidence of clinical or economic benefit, NICE recommended a change in diagnostic criteria in 2015.
aimTo compare diabetes associated maternal and neonatal complications in pregnancies complicated by GDM diagnosed using IADPSG criteria only, to those with GDM diagnosed using both IADPSG and NICE 2015 criteria. GDM screening was risk factor based.
methodsThis was a secondary analysis of a trial of women with GDM diagnosed by the IADPSG criteria (fasting blood glucose (BG) ≥ 5.1 mmol/L, 1 h ≥ 10.0 mmol/L and 2 h ≥ 8.5 mmol/L). Outcomes were compared for two groups: NICE + IADPSG defined as those with GDM diagnosed by both the NICE 2015 and IADPSG criteria (fasting BG ≥ 5.6 mmol/L, 2 h ≥ 8.5 mmol/L); and IADPSG-ONLY (fasting BG 5.1 mmol/L to 5.5 mmol/L, and/or 1-hour ≥10.0 mmol/L, and 2 h ≥ 8.5 mmol/L). We were not able to obtain data for women with a 2-h value between BG 7.8⁻8.4 mmol/L (i.e., NICE-ONLY; NICE 2015 positive and IADPSG negative). All women were treated for GDM using targets of fasting BG < 5.3 mmol/L and 1-h post prandial BG < 7.8 mmol/L respectively.
resultsOf 159 women, 65 (40.9%) were NICE + IADPSG and 94 (59.1%) IADPSG-ONLY. Hypoglycaemic medication use was similar in both groups: 52.3% NICE + IADPSG, 46.8% IADPSG-ONLY, OR 1.0 (0.5⁻1.9). The IADPSG-ONLY group delivered later than the NICE + IADPSG group; 39.0 weeks (sd 1.4) compared to 38.2 weeks (sd 2.5),
conclusionsGestational diabetes-associated perinatal complications were similar in both groups. The IADPSG criteria detect women with evidence of ongoing hyperglycaemia who may benefit from treatment during pregnancy.
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.