Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36103111›Full record

ArticleDiabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders2022

Continuous Glucose Monitoring System Profile of Women with Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Missed Using Isolated Fasting Plasma Glucose-Based Strategies Alternative to WHO 2013 Criteria: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Yashdeep Gupta, Charandeep Singh, Alpesh Goyal, Mani Kalaivani, Juhi Bharti, Seema Singhal, Garima Kachhawa, Vidushi Kulshrestha, Rajesh Kumari, Reeta Mahey and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 37% 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.

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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. 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

15 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Yashdeep GuptaDepartment of Endocrinology and Metabolism, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029, India. yashdeep@aiims.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4345-717X
Charandeep SinghDepartment of Endocrinology and Metabolism, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029, India.
Alpesh GoyalDepartment of Endocrinology and Metabolism, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029, India.
Mani KalaivaniDepartment of Biostatistics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Juhi BhartiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Seema SinghalDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Garima KachhawaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Vidushi KulshresthaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Rajesh KumariDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Reeta MaheyDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Jai B SharmaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Neena MalhotraDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Neerja BhatlaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.
Rajesh KhadgawatDepartment of Endocrinology and Metabolism, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029, India.
Nikhil TandonDepartment of Endocrinology and Metabolism, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, 110029, India.
All India Institute of Medical Sciences · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe aim of the study was to evaluate the differences in the continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS)-based glycemic parameters between women with normoglycemia and early gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) identified on the basis of mild fasting plasma glucose elevation (FPG, 5.1-5.5 mmol/L) and/or post-load plasma glucose elevation (PLG, 1-h ≥ 10.0 mmol/L or 2-h ≥ 8.5 mmol/L).

methodsThis cross-sectional study included women with singleton pregnancy (8

conclusionsAn isolated FPG threshold, especially the higher cutoff ≥ 5.6 mmol/L, can potentially miss a large proportion of women (nearly three-fourths) diagnosed with GDM per WHO 2013 criteria. Eventually, such women fare significantly differently from normoglycemic women in various CGMS parameters of clinical interest.

Indexed as

Diagnostic strategiesEarly gestational diabetes mellitusIADPSGIsolated fasting plasma glucose elevationWHO 2013 criteria

Identifiers

PMID36103111
PMCPMC9663780
OpenAlexW4295758342

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.