ArticleEClinicalMedicine2024
Cost-effectiveness of diagnosis and treatment of early gestational diabetes mellitus: economic evaluation of the TOBOGM study, an international multicenter randomized controlled trial.
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.
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
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ethnic Differences in Characteristics of Women Diagnosed With Early Gestational Diabetes: Findings From the TOBOGM Study.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2025Trial
- Cost effectiveness of early metformin in addition to usual care in the reduction of gestational diabetes mellitus effects (EMERGE)-A randomised placebo-controlled clinical trial.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2025Trial
- Impact of Simulated Risk Factor Management on Cardiovascular Disease and Costs in Type 2 Diabetes Using the ABC Model.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2026Article
- Association of Genetic Polymorphisms with Gestational Diabetes in a Kazakh Population: A Case-Control Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Exploration of Early Biomarkers for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in Pregnant Women Living Without Obesity.Journal of diabetes research · 2026Article
- Associations Between Prepregnancy Menstrual Characteristics, Age at Menarche, and the Risk of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Matched Case-Control Study.Journal of diabetes research · 2026Observational
- Cost-effectiveness of interventions for screening, treatment, and management of diabetes mellitus during pregnancy: A systematic review.Pregnancy (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025Review
- Hyperglycaemia in pregnancy: the role of ethnicity and geography in risk and outcomes.Diabetologia · 2025Review
- Maternal and neonatal outcomes according to the timing of diagnosis of gestational diabetes: A critical appraisal.World journal of diabetes · 2025Review
- Australasian Diabetes in Pregnancy Society (ADIPS) 2025 consensus recommendations for the screening, diagnosis and classification of gestational diabetes.The Medical journal of Australia · 2025Article
- miR-27a-3p, miR-222-3p and miR-340-5p as indicators of the antioxidant response activation in gestational diabetes.Molecular biology reports · 2025Article
- Evidence Gap and Knowledge Map of Early Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (eGDM) Screening in India: A Scoping Review.Current diabetes reports · 2025Article
- Mitigating the environmental effects of healthcare: the role of the endocrinologist.Nature reviews. Endocrinology · 2025Review
- First Trimester Hematological Indices in Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Meta-Analysis.Journal of the Endocrine Society · 2025Review
- Article
- PDX1 in early pregnancy is associated with decreased risks of gestational diabetes mellitus and adverse pregnancy outcomes.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
- Patient-Centred Gestational Diabetes Care: Preference Elicitation Methods and Machine Learning Innovations.Patient preference and adherence · 2025Review
- Advancement in predictive biomarkers for gestational diabetes mellitus diagnosis and related outcomes: a scoping review.BMJ open · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: A recently undertaken multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT) " Methods: Participants' healthcare resource utilization data were collected from their self-reported questionnaires and hospital records, and valued using the unit costs obtained from standard Australian national sources. Costs were reported in US dollars ($) using the purchasing power parity (PPP) estimates to facilitate comparison of costs across countries. Intention-to-treat (ITT) principle was followed. Missing cost data were replaced using multiple imputations. Bootstrapping method was used to estimate the uncertainty around mean cost difference and cost-effectiveness results. Bootstrapped cost-effect pairs were used to plot the cost-effectiveness (CE) plane and cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC). Findings: Diagnosis and treatment of early GDM was more effective and tended to be less costly, i.e., dominant (cost-saving) [-5.6% composite adverse pregnancy outcome (95% CI: -10.1%, -1.2%), -$1373 (95% CI: -$3,749, $642)] compared with usual care. Our findings were confirmed by both the CE plane (88% of the bootstrapped cost-effect pairs fall in the south-west quadrant), and CEAC (the probability of the intervention being cost-effective ranged from 84% at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold value of $10,000-99% at a WTP threshold value of $100,000 per composite adverse pregnancy outcome prevented). Sub-group analyses demonstrated that diagnosis and treatment of early GDM among women in the higher glycemic range (fasting blood glucose 95-109 mg/dl [5.3-6.0 mmol/L], 1-h blood glucose ≥191 mg/dl [10.6 mmol/L] and/or 2-h blood glucose 162-199 mg/dl [9.0-11.0 mmol/L]) was more effective and less costly (dominant) [ Interpretation: Our findings highlight the potential health and economic benefits from the diagnosis and treatment of early GDM among women with risk factors for hyperglycemia in pregnancy and supports its implementation. Long-term follow-up studies are recommended as a key future area of research to assess the potential long-term health benefits and economic consequences of the intervention. Funding: National Health and Medical Research Council (grants 1104231 and 2009326), Region O¨rebro Research Committee (grants Dnr OLL-970566 and OLL-942177), Medical Scientific Fund of the Mayor of Vienna (project 15,205 and project 23,026), South Western Sydney Local Health District Academic Unit (grant 2016), and Western Sydney University Ainsworth Trust Grant (2019).
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.