SynthesisBMC pregnancy and childbirth2026
Effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring on maternal and neonatal outcomes in gestational diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Managing Gestational Diabetes Complexity with Continuous Glucose Monitoring: A Narrative Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Technology in Diabetes: A Year in Review.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundContinuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) by providing real-time glucose data and glucose trends is a useful tool in the management of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). This systematic review and meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) evaluated the impact of CGM on maternal and neonatal outcomes in women with GDM.
methodsA comprehensive search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Scopus identified RCTs comparing CGM with SMBG in women with GDM. Outcomes were analyzed using mean differences and odds ratios, with meta-analysis performed in RevMan 5.4.
resultsFive studies were included in this review. Maternal outcomes showed a significant reduction in HbA1c [MD: -0.21% (-0.39, -0.03) p = 0.02] with CGM compared to Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose (SMBG). Neonatal outcomes indicated a lower rate of macrosomia [OR: 0.50 (0.40, 0.61) p < 0.00001] and reduced birth weight [MD: -151.68 gm (-237.21, -66.14) p = 0.0005] in the CGM group. However, no significant differences were observed in other secondary outcomes.
conclusionThe study demonstrated that the CGM group had a significantly lower HbA1c, with lower rates of macrosomia and reduced birth weights compared to SMBG. While CGM is effective for improving outcomes in GDM, further research is needed to establish pregnancy-specific glucose targets and address cost and accessibility challenges.
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.