Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40407397›Full record

ArticleDiabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association2025

Exploring the social experiences, stigma and discrimination, faced by women with gestational diabetes: A collaborative qualitative study and item-pool development.

E Holmes-Truscott, E Litterbach, C Arampatzi, C Calyx, J E Cherry, V Gilbert-Morresi, A Williams, M Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, H Teede, J Speight

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. From language matters to stigma-free communication in diabetes: Evolution, challenges, and next steps.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

E Holmes-TruscottSchool of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9139-4663
E LitterbachSchool of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4618-1068
C ArampatziGestational Diabetes Lived Experience Advisory Group (G-LEAG), Diabetes Victoria, Carlton, Victoria, Australia.
C CalyxGestational Diabetes Lived Experience Advisory Group (G-LEAG), Diabetes Victoria, Carlton, Victoria, Australia.
J E CherryGestational Diabetes Lived Experience Advisory Group (G-LEAG), Diabetes Victoria, Carlton, Victoria, Australia.
V Gilbert-MorresiGestational Diabetes Lived Experience Advisory Group (G-LEAG), Diabetes Victoria, Carlton, Victoria, Australia.
A WilliamsSchool of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.
M Fuller-TyszkiewiczSchool of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.
H TeedeMonash Centre for Health Research and Implementation, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
J SpeightSchool of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1204-6896

Funding

Diabetes Australia Research Program
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo explore experiences of stigma related to gestational diabetes (GDM) among Australian women and collaboratively develop a comprehensive item pool to assess experienced and internalised GDM-specific stigma.

methodsA GDM Lived Experience Advisory Group (G-LEAG; n = 4) informed all aspects of a two-phase qualitative research process. Phase 1 included semi-structured online interviews with 20 women with current or recent GDM. Reflexive thematic analysis identified drivers and facilitators, markers, manifestations, impacts and protective mechanisms of GDM stigma. Findings informed the development of an item pool, debriefed and refined with a subset of 10 participants in Phase 2 interviews.

resultsAll participants perceived, experienced, anticipated and/or internalised GDM-specific stigma. They perceived GDM-specific stigma to be driven by stereotypes and blame, and facilitated by societal norms regarding motherhood and pregnancy, media messaging, as well as inflexible and inconsistent healthcare policies. They reported social, emotional and self care impacts, as well as perceived loss of autonomy in clinical care. They proposed potential protective mechanisms, including social and healthcare support, self-belief and self-compassion, and community awareness. In cognitive debriefing interviews, women reported that the draft items comprehensively covered their experiences of GDM-specific stigma and offered suggestions for refinement, resulting in a 74-item pool.

conclusionsFindings provide rich insights into the experiences and impacts of stigma among women with GDM in Australia and resulted in a co-designed GDM-specific stigma item pool. The item pool is ready for psychometric assessment and item reduction, which will enable future quantification of the occurrence, impacts and mechanisms of GDM-specific stigma.

Indexed as

Diabetes, GestationalSocial StigmaAdultAustraliaFemaleHumansPregnancyQualitative Researchcollaborative developmentcommunity involvementdiabetes stigmagestational diabetes mellituspsychosocial aspectsqualitative methods

Identifiers

PMID40407397
PMCPMC12257443

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.