ArticleJournal of diabetes investigation2022
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.
Article in Journal of diabetes investigation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Managing Gestational Diabetes Complexity with Continuous Glucose Monitoring: A Narrative Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- A prospective cohort study comparing IADPSG and DIPSI criteria for diagnosing gestational diabetes and evaluating impact on maternal and neonatal health outcomes (DECIDE study protocol).BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Observational
- The role of continuous glucose monitoring for diagnosis of gestational diabetes: exploring the potential.BMC medicine · 2026Review
- Exploring Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Gestational Diabetes: A Systematic Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Association between isolated abnormal 1-hour glucose challenge test and adverse pregnancy outcomes: a retrospective review from an urban tertiary care center in the United States.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Glucose levels measured with continuous glucose monitoring in uncomplicated pregnancies.BMJ open diabetes research & care · 2024Article
- Continuous Glucose Monitoring System Profile of Women Stratified Using Different Levels of Glycated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) in Early Pregnancy: A Cross-sectional Study.Advances in therapy · 2023Article
- Continuous Glucose Monitoring System Profile of Women with Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Missed Using Isolated Fasting Plasma Glucose-Based Strategies Alternative to WHO 2013 Criteria: A Cross-Sectional Study.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
AIMS/
introductionWe aimed to evaluate and compare continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS)-based glycemic parameters in women in early pregnancy (<20 weeks of gestation) who were classified as: (i) gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) by the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG), but normoglycemia by alternate (UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, Canadian Diabetes Association and Diabetes in Pregnancy Study group of India) criteria; and (ii) normoglycemia by both (IADPSG and alternate) criteria. MATERIAL AND
methodsIn this cross-sectional study, eligible women underwent standard 75-g oral glucose tolerance test, followed by the placement of a CGMS. Glycemia-related parameters were calculated using the standard approach for CGMS data in pregnancy.
resultsWe enrolled 96 women at 14.0 ± 3.2 weeks of gestation. Of the women diagnosed as GDM by IADPSG criteria, 34.2%, 26.3% and 44.7% were classified as normoglycemic by UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, Canadian Diabetes Association and Diabetes in Pregnancy Study group of India criteria, respectively. Mean 1-h postprandial glucose and time above range were significantly higher in women who were GDM by IADPSG, but normoglycemia by Canadian Diabetes Association criteria, compared with women with normoglycemia using both criteria. Similarly, mean 1-h postprandial glucose, 2-h postprandial glucose, peak postprandial glucose, 1-h postprandial glucose excursion and time above range were significantly higher in women who were not identified as GDM by the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence criteria. Finally, women missed by the Diabetes in Pregnancy Study group of India criteria had significantly higher mean 1-h postprandial glucose, 2-h postprandial glucose, peak postprandial glucose, postprandial glucose excursion, 24-h glucose and time above range parameters.
conclusionsMore than one-quarter of women diagnosed as GDM by IADPSG criteria are not identified by alternate criteria. Such women are significantly different from normoglycemic women in terms of several CGMS-based glycemic parameters of clinical significance.
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.