Evidence mapPaperPMID 24450389Full record

SynthesisBMC pregnancy and childbirth2014

From screening to postpartum follow-up - the determinants and barriers for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) services, a systematic review.

Karoline Kragelund Nielsen, Anil Kapur, Peter Damm, Maximilian de Courten, Ib Christian Bygbjerg

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 131 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
131citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
14.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

NCT04190199 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Exploring Nutritype Signature of Type 2 Diabetes Risks in Women Post-Gestational Diabetes Mellitus

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversiti Putra MalaysiaRan2020 to 2021Enrolled270ConditionsType 2 Diabetes, Gestational DiabetesArmsObservational
NCT06099509 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Self-Administered 2-Hour Oral Glucose Tolerance Test: A Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorPrisma Health-UpstateRan2023 to 2025Enrolled200ConditionsGestational Diabetes, Postpartum Disorder, Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in PregnancyArmsSelf-administered oral glucose tolerance test
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

131 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 264 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

71 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Karoline Kragelund NielsenDepartment of International Health, Immunology and Microbiology, University of Copenhagen, Oester Farimagsgade 5, Building 9, Copenhagen DK-1014, K, Denmark. kani@sund.ku.dk.
Anil Kapur
Peter Damm
Maximilian de Courten
Ib Christian Bygbjerg
University of Copenhagen · DKRigshospitalet · DKWorld Diabetes Foundation · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) - a transitory form of diabetes first recognised during pregnancy complicates between < 1% and 28% of all pregnancies. GDM has important short and long-term health consequences for both the mother and her offspring. To prevent adverse pregnancy outcomes and to prevent or delay future onset of type 2 diabetes in mother and offspring, timely detection, optimum treatment, and preventive postpartum care and follow-up is necessary. However the area remains grossly under-prioritised.

methodsTo investigate determinants and barriers to GDM care from initial screening and diagnosis to prenatal treatment and postpartum follow-up, a PubMed database search to identify quantitative and qualitative studies on the subject was done in September 2012. Fifty-eight relevant studies were reviewed.

resultsAdherence to prevailing GDM screening guidelines and compliance to screening tests seems sub-optimal at best and arbitrary at worst, with no clear or consistent correlation to health care provider, health system or client characteristics. Studies indicate that most women express commitment and motivation for behaviour change to protect the health of their unborn baby, but compliance to recommended treatment and advice is fraught with challenges, and precious little is known about health system or societal factors that hinder compliance and what can be done to improve it. A number of barriers related to health care provider/system and client characteristics have been identified by qualitative studies. Immediately following a GDM pregnancy many women, when properly informed, desire and intend to maintain healthy lifestyles to prevent future diabetes, but find the effort challenging. Adherence to recommended postpartum screening and continued lifestyle modifications seems even lower. Here too, health care provider, health system and client related determinants and barriers were identified. Studies reveal that sense of self-efficacy and social support are key determinants.

conclusionsThe paper identifies and discusses determinants and barriers for GDM care, fully recognising that these are highly dependent on the context.

Indexed as

Guideline AdherencePatient CompliancePostnatal CarePrenatal CareBody Mass IndexBody WeightDiabetes, GestationalFemaleHealth BehaviorHumansLife StylePractice Guidelines as TopicPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID24450389
PMCPMC3901889
OpenAlexW1976933777

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.