Trial reportBMC pregnancy and childbirth2012
Cost-effectiveness of an exercise program during pregnancy to prevent gestational diabetes: results of an economic evaluation alongside a randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- Are Lifestyle Interventions to Reduce Excessive Gestational Weight Gain Cost Effective? A Systematic Review.Current diabetes reports · 2020Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness of controlling gestational diabetes mellitus: a systematic review.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2019Pooled it
- Lifestyle Interventions to Prevent Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluation Studies.Journal of diabetes research · 2016 · on this mapPooled it
- Diet or exercise, or both, for preventing excessive weight gain in pregnancy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Healthy eating and lifestyle in pregnancy (HELP): a cluster randomised trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a weight management intervention for pregnant women with obesity on weight at 12 months postpartum.International journal of obesity (2005) · 2021Trial
- Cost-effectiveness of healthy eating and/or physical activity promotion in pregnant women at increased risk of gestational diabetes mellitus: economic evaluation alongside the DALI study, a European multicenter randomized controlled trial.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2018Trial
- Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of a Cluster-Randomized Prenatal Lifestyle Counseling Trial: A Seven-Year Follow-Up.PloS one · 2016Trial
- Trial
- Effectiveness of Lifestyle Interventions during Pregnancy on Preventing Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in High-Risk Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses of Published RCTs.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Gestational diabetes mellitus: a qualitative study of lived experiences of South Asian immigrant women and perspectives of their health care providers in Melbourne, Australia.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2021Article
- Assessing the Effect of Including Social Costs in Economic Evaluations of Diabetes-Related Interventions: A Systematic Review.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2021Review
- Cost effectiveness of different screening strategies for gestational diabetes mellitus screening: study protocol of a randomized community non-inferiority trial.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2019Article
- Population health: modest glycaemic improvements in a pregnant cohort with mild glucose intolerance decreased adverse outcomes.Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology · 2014Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is increasing worldwide. GDM and the risks associated with GDM lead to increased health care costs and losses in productivity. The objective of this study is to evaluate whether the FitFor2 exercise program during pregnancy is cost-effective from a societal perspective as compared to standard care.
methodsA randomised controlled trial (RCT) and simultaneous economic evaluation of the FitFor2 program were conducted. Pregnant women at risk for GDM were randomised to an exercise program to prevent high maternal blood glucose (n = 62) or to standard care (n = 59). The exercise program consisted of two sessions of aerobic and strengthening exercises per week. Clinical outcome measures were maternal fasting blood glucose levels, insulin sensitivity and infant birth weight. Quality of life was measured using the EuroQol 5-D and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were calculated. Resource utilization and sick leave data were collected by questionnaires. Data were analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Missing data were imputed using multiple imputations. Bootstrapping techniques estimated the uncertainty surrounding the cost differences and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.
resultsThere were no statistically significant differences in any outcome measure. During pregnancy, total health care costs and costs of productivity losses were statistically non-significant (mean difference €1308; 95%CI €-229 - €3204). The cost-effectiveness analyses showed that the exercise program was not cost-effective in comparison to the control group for blood glucose levels, insulin sensitivity, infant birth weight or QALYs.
conclusionThe twice-weekly exercise program for pregnant women at risk for GDM evaluated in the present study was not cost-effective compared to standard care. Based on these results, implementation of this exercise program for the prevention of GDM cannot be recommended.
trial registrationNTR1139.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.