Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30843102›Full record

SynthesisDiabetologia2019

Gestational diabetes and the risk of cardiovascular disease in women: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Caroline K Kramer, Sara Campbell, Ravi Retnakaran

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Diabetologia, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07446205 (Poi for Mama), which is not on this map. Cited by 534 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
534citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
75.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT07446205 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Poi for Mama: a Pilot to Improve Maternal Microbiome and Gestational Diabetes Risk

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of HawaiiRan2026 to 2027Enrolled50ConditionsGestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM), PregnancyArmsFermented Poi
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

534 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 902 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Guideline
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: Evidence, Clinical Benefits and Remaining Challenges.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2026
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

474 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Caroline K Kramer *Leadership Sinai Centre for Diabetes, Mount Sinai Hospital, 60 Murray Street, Suite L5-025, Mailbox-21, Toronto, ON, M5T 3L9, Canada.
Sara Campbell *Leadership Sinai Centre for Diabetes, Mount Sinai Hospital, 60 Murray Street, Suite L5-025, Mailbox-21, Toronto, ON, M5T 3L9, Canada.
Ravi RetnakaranLeadership Sinai Centre for Diabetes, Mount Sinai Hospital, 60 Murray Street, Suite L5-025, Mailbox-21, Toronto, ON, M5T 3L9, Canada. Ravi.Retnakaran@sinaihealthsystem.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1989-027X
Mount Sinai Hospital · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aims/hypothesisWomen who develop gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) have an elevated lifetime risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Recently, a series of studies has suggested that women with GDM also have an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). However, it is unclear if this risk is dependent upon the intercurrent development of type 2 diabetes. Thus, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of GDM on future risk of incident CVD and to ascertain the role of type 2 diabetes in this regard.

methodsWe systematically searched the PubMed and EMBASE databases for observational studies that evaluated the association of GDM with subsequent CVD, with publication between 1 January 1950 and 30 August 2018. Two independent reviewers extracted data and the analysis was performed in accordance with Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines. RRs were calculated using a random-effects model to assess the predictive value of GDM for future cardiovascular events. To evaluate whether incident type 2 diabetes in the GDM population influenced the association with CVD, we used meta-regression models followed by sensitivity analyses restricted to women who did not develop type 2 diabetes during follow-up.

resultsA pooled analysis of nine studies yielded data from 5,390,591 women (101,424 cardiovascular events). Compared with those who did not have GDM, women with GDM had a twofold higher risk of future cardiovascular events (RR 1.98 [95% CI 1.57, 2.50]). Meta-regression analysis showed that the rates of incident type 2 diabetes across the studies did not affect this risk (p = 0.34). Moreover, when restricted to women who did not develop type 2 diabetes, GDM remained associated with a 56% higher risk of future cardiovascular events (RR 1.56 [95% CI 1.04, 2.32]). GDM conferred a 2.3-fold increased risk of cardiovascular events in the first decade postpartum (RR 2.31 [95% CI 1.57, 3.39]). CONCLUSIONS/

interpretationThe diagnosis of GDM identifies young women who have a twofold higher risk of cardiovascular events postpartum compared with their peers. This risk is not dependent upon intercurrent type 2 diabetes and is apparent within the first decade after pregnancy. Thus, even without progressing to type 2 diabetes, women with GDM comprise an at-risk population for CVD and hence a potential opportunity for early risk factor surveillance and risk modification.

Indexed as

AnimalsCardiovascular DiseasesDiabetes, GestationalDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2FemaleHumansPregnancyRisk FactorsWomen's HealthCardiovascular diseaseGestational diabetesMeta-analysisRisk factorsSystematic reviewType 2 diabetesWomen’s health

Identifiers

PMID30843102
OpenAlexW2921935358

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.