ArticleJournal of family medicine and primary care2024
Diagnostic accuracy of DIPSI criteria for diagnosing gestational diabetes mellitus in Puducherry.
Article in Journal of family medicine and primary care, 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.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Context: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is a major concern in recent years. During pregnancy, it is difficult to consume 75 g of glucose in the fasting state as pregnant women may experience symptoms such as vomiting. The Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Group India (DIPSI) criterion requires a single prick in the non-fasting state to collect the sample for diagnosing GDM. Aims: This study aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of DIPSI criteria compared to the WHO criteria for GDM diagnosis. Settings and Design: A community-based cross-sectional study was conducted among pregnant mothers attending the primary health centers in Puducherry from August 2022 to November 2022. Methods and Material: A total of 384 samples were selected, and 75 g of anhydrous glucose was given after 8 hours of overnight fasting. Both fasting and postprandial venous blood sugar levels were measured to determine the prevalence of GDM as per the WHO 2013 criteria. After 2 days, GDM was diagnosed among all study participants based on the DIPSI criteria. Further analysis was done. Results: The prevalence of GDM was 14.1% and 12.8% per the WHO 2013 and DIPSI criteria, respectively. In comparison to the WHO 2013 criteria, DIPSI had 79.63% sensitivity, 98.18% specificity, 87.76% positive predictive value, and 96.72% negative predictive value. The results of kappa statistics showed that there was almost perfect agreement between the WHO 2013 criteria and DIPSI criteria. Conclusions: The present study shows that the DIPSI criteria can be used to screen and diagnose GDM as there is no need for overnight fasting. The blood glucose value can be measured easily with a single prick, which is comfortable for both pregnant women and treating doctors.
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.