ArticlePractical laboratory medicine2024
Glycated albumin in pregnancy correlates negatively with body mass index and contributes to the risk of gestational diabetes mellitus.
Article in Practical laboratory medicine, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The aims of our study were to establish a reference interval for glycated albumin (GA) in gestational week 30, to investigate whether GA can replace or reduce the need for oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) in pregnancy, and to reassess the usefulness of body mass-index (BMI), age and fasting glucose in detection of gestational diabetes (GDM). Design: and methods: We measured GA in 486 healthy pregnant women. Reference interval was calculated using the central 95 % of the results. ROC curves were created to assess the ability of GA, fasting glucose and BMI separately to detect GDM, and logistic regression analysis was used to estimate risk of developing GDM given the level of the same markers. Finally, multiple logistic regression analysis based on GA, fasting glucose and BMI was used to find a strategy of predicting a patient's risk of GDM. Results: The reference interval for GA at week 30 of gestation is 6.8-10.3 %. The analysis has a low AUC (0.53) with respect to detecting GDM. It increases slightly to 0.64 when corrected for BMI, as GA is inversely correlated to BMI. Combining GA with fasting glucose and BMI at gestational weeks 16-20 could raise the AUC to 0.80. Conclusion: GA cannot be recommended to replace OGTT for the diagnosis of GDM. Nor can it be used to identify women at risk of developing GDM. GA combined with fasting glucose and BMI in early pregnancy could be a useful model to estimate risk 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.