ArticleBMJ open2024
Adverse pregnancy outcomes in gestational diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Cellular and Molecular Pathophysiology of Gestational Diabetes.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Pooled it
- Mobile Health Interventions in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus and Pregnancy Outcomes: A Scoping Review.Cureus · 2026Review
- Dose-response relationship between early pregnancy blood pressure and gestational diabetes mellitus based on propensity score matching: a retrospective study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- A Qualitative Study on TPB-Based Factors for Breastfeeding Cessation in Women With Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in the Early Postpartum Period.Journal of pregnancy · 2026Article
- Predictive Value of the second-Trimester Triglyceride-Glucose Index and Its Derived Indices for Macrosomia in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus.Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy · 2026Article
- Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes in Women with Gestational Diabetes Using Different Diagnostic Criteria: A Study from the Northern Adriatic Region of Croatia.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Article
- Causal inference and risk prediction of gestational diabetes mellitus based on case-control study and Mendel randomization.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
- Gestational diabetes mellitus remains the risk factor for neonatal adverse outcomes in multiparous women.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionGestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes, including adverse outcomes for both the mother and the fetus. Different diagnostic criteria are used for GDM, and it is not clear how these affect the reported prevalence of adverse pregnancy outcomes. This protocol is for a systematic review to describe and compare the prevalence of adverse pregnancy outcomes in GDM using the different diagnostic criteria applied in various countries/regions of the world. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A systematic review and meta-analysis will be carried out. A comprehensive search of observational studies that report the outcomes of interest to this review from 2010 to 2021 will be conducted. We will search the major electronic databases such as PubMed, Scopus, CINHAL and Google Scholar, and screen references of included studies for additional studies. Meta-analyses will be performed, if there is low heterogeneity, and pooled estimates per outcome reported. We will use the bias-adjusted inverse variance heterogeneity model and random effects models, depending on the heterogeneity observed, to pool prevalence estimates and perform subgroup analyses by region, by age group, by diagnostic criteria and by GDM screening method if sufficient data are available. We will also compare the prevalence of adverse outcomes by diagnostic method and report prevalence ratios. We will report 95% confidence estimates for all estimates. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required as the review uses published data. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020155061.
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.