ReviewReproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.)2024
Time to Move Beyond a Binary Criterion for Gestational Diabetes?
Review in Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Over the years, several international guidelines have been developed by specialist organizations for the diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). However, these guidelines vary and lack consensus on what level of glycemia defines GDM and worryingly, there is now evidence of over- or- under-diagnosis of women with GDM by current criteria. Towards this end, the National Priorities Research Program (NPRP) funded a program of research aimed at elucidating the problem with GDM diagnosis. It was determined, on completion of the project, that the solution required diagnosis of graded levels of dysglycemia in pregnancy and not just a diagnosis of presence or absence of GDM. A new diagnostic criterion (called the NPRP criterion) was created based on a single numerical summary of the three readings from the oral glucose tolerance test (GTT) that diagnosed women in pregnancy into four levels: normal, impaired, GDM and high risk GDM. This paper now examines existing GDM criteria vis-à-vis the NPRP criterion. It is noted that no significant change has happened over the years for existing criteria except for a gradual reduction in the threshold values of individual time-points or the number of time points, bringing us towards over-diagnosis of GDM in pregnancy. The new criterion unifies all readings from the GTT into one numerical value and, because it results in four levels of glycemia, represents a new way forwards for GDM diagnosis and can potentially reduce the rates of under diagnosis and over diagnosis of GDM.
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.