Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35941555›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2022

A scoping review of gestational diabetes mellitus healthcare: experiences of care reported by pregnant women internationally.

Sheila Pham, Kate Churruca, Louise A Ellis, Jeffrey Braithwaite

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 'No matter what time of day': The value of joining Facebook groups supporting women's self-management of gestational diabetes mellitus.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

4 authors.

Sheila PhamCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, 75 Talavera Rd, North Ryde, NSW, 2113, Sydney, Australia. sheila.pham@mq.edu.au.
Kate ChurrucaCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, 75 Talavera Rd, North Ryde, NSW, 2113, Sydney, Australia.
Louise A EllisCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, 75 Talavera Rd, North Ryde, NSW, 2113, Sydney, Australia.
Jeffrey BraithwaiteCentre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, 75 Talavera Rd, North Ryde, NSW, 2113, Sydney, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is a condition associated with pregnancy that engenders additional healthcare demand. A growing body of research includes empirical studies focused on pregnant women's GDM healthcare experiences. The aim of this scoping review is to map findings, highlight gaps and investigate the way research has been conducted into the healthcare experiences of women with GDM.

methodsA systematic search of primary research using a number of databases was conducted in September 2021. Studies were included if they had an explicit aim of focusing on GDM and included direct reporting of participants' experiences of healthcare. Key data from each study was extracted into a purposely-designed form and synthesised using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis.

resultsFifty-seven articles were included in the analysis. The majority of studies used qualitative methodology, and did not have an explicit theoretical orientation. Most studies were conducted in urban areas of high-income countries and recruitment and research was almost fully conducted in clinical and other healthcare settings. Women found inadequate information a key challenge, and support from healthcare providers a critical factor. Experiences of prescribed diet, medication and monitoring greatly varied across settings. Additional costs associated with managing GDM was cited as a problem in some studies. Overall, women reported significant mental distress in relation to their experience of GDM.

conclusionsThis scoping review draws together reported healthcare experiences of pregnant women with GDM from around the world. Commonalities and differences in the global patient experience of GDM healthcare are identified.

Indexed as

Diabetes, GestationalFemaleHealth FacilitiesHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHealth PersonnelHumansPregnancyPregnant PeopleDelivery of healthcareGestational diabetes mellitusPatient experiencePregnancyScoping review

Identifiers

PMID35941555
PMCPMC9361509

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.