Universal versus selective screening for the detection, control and prognosis of gestational diabetes mellitus in Argentina

McCarthy, Antonio Desmond; Curciarello, Renata; Castiglione, Nicolás; Tayeldín, Marina Fernández; Costa, Diego; Arnol, Verónica; Prospitti, Anabela; Aliano, Analía; Archuby, D.; Graieb, Augusto; Torres, María José; Etcheverry, Susana B.; Apezteguía, María

doi:10.1007/s00592-009-0107-6

Cited by 26 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…10 It is also reported that GDM is increasing in most parts of the world during the past 20 years among several groups of population. 7 This finding is almost comparable with findings of studies in Sri Lanka and Nigeria 12,13 but lower than some other countries' studies like India 14 , Qatar 15 , Argentina 16 , Pakistan 17 and Tanzania. 18 Differences in prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus among different countries can be related to differences in socio-economic status, life style and variations in screening and diagnostic methods.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

Prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus and associated factors in Southern Ethiopia

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Presence of gestational diabetes mellitus during pregnancy has serious complications for both mother and child. Its burden is increasing in low and middle-income countries but, little is known about its contribution in Ethiopia. Aims and Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus and to identify associated factors in Wolaita Zone, Southern Ethiopia. Materials and Methods: Institution based cross sectional study was carried out from August 2017 to October 2017 in Wolaita Zone, southern Ethiopia. A total of 518 pregnant women were participated from 2 hospitals and 4 health centers. Capillary blood samples were collected at fasting and 2 hours after 75gm glucose load to measure blood sugar and diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus was made by using 2013 World Health Organization (WHO) criteria. Binary logistic regression model was applied to assess risk factors of gestational diabetes mellitus. Results: Prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus was 4.2% (95% CI, 2.5, 6.2) with mean post glucose load level of 160.1 mg/dl (6.3) and 15(4%) among urban residents and 7(4.9%) among rural residents. The proportion of gestational diabetes mellitus increases with increase in number of pregnancies. Previous history of spontaneous abortion (AOR: 3.5; 95%CI: 1.7-14.6), family history of type II diabetes (AOR: 4.3; 95%CI: 1.3-8.7) and previous caesarean section (AOR: 7.5; 95%CI: 1.3-14.4) were found to be significantly associated with gestational diabetes mellitus. Conclusions: The prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus is higher as compared to other studies conducted in the country. Strengthening screening, care and prevention strategies for gestational diabetes mellitus are important to improve maternal and child health.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

Prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus and associated factors in Southern Ethiopia

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thirty-five studies were cohort [8, 16, 23, 25–27, 30–34, 38–40, 42, 43, 45, 46, 48, 50, 51, 54, 55, 57, 60–66, 69, 71, 72] and 16 cross-sectional [24, 28, 29, 35–37, 41, 44, 47, 49, 52, 53, 56, 67, 68, 70]. Fourteen (27.4%) studies, classified as group 1 [16, 33, 35, 37, 39, 42, 49, 59, 60, 62, 68–71] used IADPSG; 6 (11.7%) as group 2 [24, 41, 43, 47, 50, 54], 11 (21.5%) as group 3 [28, 31, 55–58, 63–67], 2 (3.9%) as group 4 [36, 53], 11 (21.5%) as group 5 [23, 27, 30, 32, 38, 40, 44–46, 51, 52], 4 (7.8%) as group 6 [8, 29, 34, 48] and 3 (5.8%) as group 7 [25, 26, 61].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes on its prevalence: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Behboudi‐Gandevani

Amiri

Yarandi

et al. 2019

Diabetol Metab Syndr

252

195

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe absence of universal gold standards for screening of gestational diabetes (GDM) has led to heterogeneity in the identification of GDM, thereby impacting the accurate estimation of the prevalence of GDM. We aimed to evaluate the effect of different diagnostic criteria for GDM on its prevalence among general populations of pregnant women worldwide, and also to investigate the prevalence of GDM based on various geographic regions.MethodsA comprehensive literature search was performed in PubMed, Scopus and Google-scholar databases for retrieving articles in English investigating the prevalence of GDM. All populations were classified to seven groups based-on their diagnostic criteria for GDM. Heterogeneous and non-heterogeneous results were analyzed using the fixed effect and random-effects inverse variance model for calculating the pooled effect. Publication bias was assessed by Begg’s test. The Meta-prop method was used for the pooled estimation of the prevalence of GDM. Meta-regression was conducted to explore the association between prevalence of GDM and its diagnostic criteria. Modified Newcastle–Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for nonrandomized studies was used for quality assessment of the studies included; the ROBINS and the Cochrane Collaboration’s risk of bias assessment tools were used to evaluate the risk of bias.ResultsWe used data from 51 population-based studies, i.e. a study population of 5,349,476 pregnant women. Worldwide, the pooled overall-prevalence of GDM, regardless of type of screening threshold categories was 4.4%, (95% CI 4.3–4.4%). The pooled overall prevalence of GDM in the diagnostic threshold used in IADPSG criteria was 10.6% (95% CI 10.5–10.6%), which was the highest pooled prevalence of GDM among studies included. Meta-regression showed that the prevalence of GDM among studies that used the IADPSG criteria was significantly higher (6–11 fold) than other subgroups. The highest and lowest prevalence of GDM, regardless of screening criteria were reported in East-Asia and Australia (Pooled-P = 11.4%, 95% CI 11.1–11.7%) and (Pooled-P = 3.6%, 95% CI 3.6–3.7%), respectively.ConclusionOver the past quarter century, the diagnosis of gestational diabetes has been changed several times; along with worldwide increasing trend of obesity and diabetes, reducing the threshold of GDM is associated with a significant increase in the incidence of GDM. The harm and benefit of reducing the threshold of diagnostic criteria on pregnancy outcomes, women’s psychological aspects, and health costs should be evaluated precisely.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13098-019-0406-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

“…The included studies were from Pakistan (22–24), India (25–37), Sri Lanka (38, 39), Bangladesh (40), Thailand (41–45), China (46–49), Vietnam (50, 51), Turkey (52–56), Iran (57–59), South Africa (60), Ethiopia (61), Nigeria (62–64), Argentina (65), Brazil (66) and Cuba (67) (Table 1). The largest number of studies (12) came from India.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The burden of diabetes mellitus during pregnancy in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review

Kanguru

Bezawada

Hussein

et al. 2014

Global Health Action

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundLittle is known about the burden of diabetes mellitus (DM) in pregnancy in low- and middle-income countries despite high prevalence and mortality rates being observed in these countries.ObjectiveTo investigate the prevalence and geographical patterns of DM in pregnancy up to 1 year post-delivery in low- and middle-income countries.Search strategyMedline, Embase, Cochrane (Central), Cinahl and CAB databases were searched with no date restrictions.Selection criteriaArticles assessing the prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), and types 1 and 2 DM were sought.Data collection and analysisArticles were independently screened by at least two reviewers. Forest plots were used to present prevalence rates and linear trends calculated by linear regression where appropriate.Main resultsA total of 45 articles were included. The prevalence of GDM varied. Diagnosis was made by the American Diabetes Association criteria (1.50–15.5%), the Australian Diabetes in Pregnancy Society criteria (20.8%), the Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Group India criteria (13.4%), the European Association for the Study of Diabetes criteria (1.6%), the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups criteria (8.9–20.4%), the National Diabetes Data Group criteria (0.56–6.30%) and the World Health Organization criteria (0.4–24.3%). Vietnam, India and Cuba had the highest prevalence rates. Types 1 and 2 DM were less often reported. Reports of maternal mortality due to DM were not found. No geographical patterns of the prevalence of GDM could be confirmed but data from Africa is particularly limited.ConclusionExisting published data are insufficient to build a clear picture of the burden and distribution of DM in pregnancy in low- and middle-income countries. Consensus on a common diagnostic criterion for GDM is needed. Type 1 and 2 DM in pregnancy and postpartum DM are other neglected areas.

show abstract

Universal versus selective screening for the detection, control and prognosis of gestational diabetes mellitus in Argentina

Cited by 26 publications

References 17 publications

Prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus and associated factors in Southern Ethiopia

Prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus and associated factors in Southern Ethiopia

The impact of diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes on its prevalence: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The burden of diabetes mellitus during pregnancy in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About