ReviewCureus2025
The Impact of Conservative Versus Pharmacological Management on Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes in Gestational Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is a common complication in pregnancy. Its early identification through targeted screening and timely management with lifestyle or pharmacological interventions is essential to optimise outcomes. Current evidence on GDM management is limited, with few studies directly comparing conservative measures with pharmacological therapy. This review evaluates the impact of conservative versus pharmacological management on maternal and neonatal outcomes. Databases and grey literature were searched, and identified studies were screened using pre-defined eligibility criteria. Data were extracted from the included studies, and study quality was appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) tool. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were pooled in a meta-analysis. Conservative management was associated with a 30% reduction in adverse maternal outcomes (risk ratio (RR) 0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.50-0.98, p=0.04) and a 26% reduction in adverse neonatal outcomes (RR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.60-0.96, p=0.02). Subgroup analyses revealed no significant differences between pharmacological therapies. Overall, conservative management of GDM appears to improve both maternal and neonatal outcomes compared to pharmacological management. These findings support lifestyle-based interventions as a safe and effective option, though further research is needed to confirm clinical benefits and refine clinical guidance.
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.