Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35199420›Full record

ArticleThe journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research2022

Incidence of gestational diabetes mellitus before and after the Covid-19 lockdown: A retrospective cohort study.

Marco La Verde, Marco Torella, Gaetano Riemma, Giuliana Narciso, Irene Iavarone, Ligia Gliubizzi, Marica Palma, Maddalena Morlando, Nicola Colacurci, Pasquale De Franciscis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

10 authors.

Marco La VerdeDepartment of Woman, Child and General and Specialized Surgery, Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6071-0245
Marco TorellaDepartment of Woman, Child and General and Specialized Surgery, Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.
Gaetano RiemmaDepartment of Woman, Child and General and Specialized Surgery, Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3676-7716
Giuliana NarcisoDepartment of Woman, Child and General and Specialized Surgery, Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.
Irene IavaroneDepartment of Woman, Child and General and Specialized Surgery, Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.
Ligia GliubizziDepartment of Woman, Child and General and Specialized Surgery, Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.
Marica PalmaDepartment of Woman, Child and General and Specialized Surgery, Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.
Maddalena MorlandoDepartment of Woman, Child and General and Specialized Surgery, Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.
Nicola ColacurciDepartment of Woman, Child and General and Specialized Surgery, Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.
Pasquale De FranciscisDepartment of Woman, Child and General and Specialized Surgery, Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo evaluate whether the first Covid-19 lockdown for Italian citizens (March to July 2021) might have altered the incidence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM).

methodsA retrospective single-center study in a tertiary referral center. Primary outcome was the incidence of GDM among pregnant women. GDM incidence, from June 11, 2019 to December 4, 2020, was compared by dividing the study time as follows: from the beginning of the study to before Covid-19 lockdown (from June 11, 2019, to March 9, 2020) and lockdown period (from March 10, 2020, to December 4, 2020). GDM was diagnosed with a 75-g, 2-h oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) at 24-28 gestational weeks.

resultsConcerning 1295 women, GDM incidence increased during the lockdown period (9.3% vs. 3.4%, p < 0.001). Higher pregnancy weight gain with an increased body mass index (BMI) at the delivery was reported during the lockdown (31.3 vs. 28.4 kg/m

conclusionsPregnant women during the Covid-19 lockdown might have experienced higher BMI and pregnancy weight gain with increased GDM diagnoses. This may be related to physical limitations and emotional distress experienced during the lockdown. However, evidence is limited due to restricted study duration and random variations of outcomes across time. More studies are needed to understand the dietary patterns and the physical activity changes during the Covid-19 lockdown and its impact on fetal outcomes.

Indexed as

COVID-19Diabetes, GestationalGestational Weight GainCommunicable Disease ControlFemaleHumansIncidenceMalePregnancyPregnancy OutcomeRetrospective StudiesCovid-19diabetes gestational mellitusgestational diabeteslockdownpregnancypregnancy outcomesSARS-CoV-2

Identifiers

PMID35199420
PMCPMC9115303

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.