Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35146306›Full record

ArticleJournal of health monitoring2021

Gestational diabetes in Germany: Development of screening participation and prevalence.

Lukas Reitzle, Christian Schmidt, Christin Heidemann, Andrea Icks, Matthias Kaltheuner, Thomas Ziese, Christa Scheidt-Nave

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of health monitoring, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Evolution of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus across Continents in 21st Century.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Review
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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Lukas ReitzleRobert Koch Institute, Berlin Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring.
Christian SchmidtRobert Koch Institute, Berlin Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring.
Christin HeidemannRobert Koch Institute, Berlin Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring.
Andrea IcksInstitute for Health Services Research and Health Economics, German Diabetes Center, Leibniz Center for Diabetes Research at the Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf.
Matthias KaltheunerScientific institute of specialized diabetologists, winDiab, Düsseldorf.
Thomas ZieseRobert Koch Institute, Berlin Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring.
Christa Scheidt-NaveRobert Koch Institute, Berlin Department of Epidemiology and Health Monitoring.
Robert Koch Institute · DEDeutsches Diabetes-Zentrum e.V. · DERoyal Dutch Pharmacists Association · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is an important risk factor for pregnancy complications. Since 2012, the Federal Joint Committee's maternity directive recommends a two-step screening for GDM with a pre-test and subsequent diagnostic test if the pre-test is positive. This study analyses the implementation and development over time of GDM screening participation and prevalence in Germany. The data basis is the external inpatient obstetrics quality assurance documentation, which covers all births in hospital. Women with diabetes before pregnancy were excluded. The study defined women as GDM cases if the condition was documented in maternity records or if the ICD-10 diagnosis O24.4 was coded for inpatients at discharge and figures were determined for the years 2013 to 2018. As the documentation of screening tests has only been included in the data set since 2016, screening participation for the years 2016 to 2018 were estimated and evaluated based on the pre-test and/or diagnostic tests documented in maternity records. In 2018, the majority of all women who gave birth in hospitals had had a pre-test conducted (65.0%) or a pre-test and diagnostic test (18.2%) in line with the two-step procedure. A further 6.7% received a diagnostic test alone. GDM screening participation increased over time from 83.4% in 2016 to 89.9% in 2018. The prevalence of a documented GDM increased from 4.6% to 6.8% between 2013 and 2018. In 2018, this equates to 51,318 women with GDM. Reliably assessing the extent and causes of this development will require continuous analyses of screening implementation, documentation and changes in maternal risk factors.

Indexed as

DIABETES MELLITUSEPIDEMIOLOGYGESTATIONAL DIABETESPRENATAL CARESCREENING

Identifiers

PMID35146306
PMCPMC8734204
OpenAlexW3182459160

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.