SynthesisHealth promotion perspectives2024
Examining the quality of life among pregnant women diagnosed with gestational diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta-analysis for women's health promotion.
Synthesis in Health promotion perspectives, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Effects of lifestyle education interventions on quality of life and fbg in women with gestational diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Quality of life (QoL) of women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is one of the fundamental issues and public health challenges. This study examines the QoL among pregnant women with GDM through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: A search was conducted in Scopus, PubMed, and the Web of Science databases for articles published until Jan 30, 2024. Manual searches of gray literature, Google Scholar, reference checks, and citation checks were conducted. The JBI's Critical Appraisal Checklist for Analytical Cross-Sectional Studies was utilized to assess the quality of the articles' reporting. The random model implemented in Stata software (version 16; Stata Corp.) was utilized to conduct the meta-analysis. Results: Among the 516 studies obtained from the literature, only 15 were deemed suitable for inclusion. Most studies (73.3%) were conducted in nations with high-income levels. Additionally, general QoL was assessed in most studies (11 studies). The SF-36 and WHOQOLBREF questionnaires were the most often utilized. Based on the SF-36 measure, there was no statistically significant difference in the QoL of patients with GDM compared to the control group in most of dimensions. The WHOQOL-BREF instrument was utilized to estimate the QoL score at 49.69. The EQ-5D-5L tool revealed a difference in QoL scores between the GDM and control groups (MD=-7.40). The research findings were highly heterogeneous. The median evaluation score for the reporting quality of the articles was calculated to be 5, with a mean of 4.8 out of 7. Conclusion: The results of the present study showed that GDM reduces the QoL of pregnant women, especially in terms of mental and social health. Therefore, interventions and support programs should be designed and implemented to improve these women's QoL.
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.