Skip to content
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Menu
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Menu
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Publication Details
AFRICAN RESEARCH NEXUS
SHINING A SPOTLIGHT ON AFRICAN RESEARCH
biochemistry, genetics and molecular biology
Gestational diabetes: Dilemma caused by multiple international diagnostic criteria
Diabetic Medicine, Volume 22, No. 12, Year 2005
Notification
URL copied to clipboard!
Description
Aims: To highlight the variation in the diagnosis of gestational diabetes (GDM) as defined by six well-accepted international expert panels. Methods: Two thousand, five hundred and fifty-four pregnant women underwent a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test for routine, antenatal GDM screening. They were classified using the criteria of the American Diabetes Association, Australasian Diabetes in Pregnancy Society, the Canadian Diabetes Association, the European Association for the Study of Diabetes, the New Zealand Society for the study of Diabetes and the World Health Organization (WHO). Results: Between any two criteria, both the GDM prevalence (range; 7.9-24.9%) and the women classified differently [range; 70 (2.7%)-454 (17.8%) women], was significant (P < 0.001). The most inclusive criteria, i.e. Australasian, despite generating the highest prevalence of GDM, did not pick up all the women identified by the most restrictive criteria, i.e. Canadian. The Australasian and the WHO criteria were associated with an increase in the number of Caesarean sections [odds ratio (OR); 1.64, 1.45, respectively] while the American, Canadian and New Zealand criteria identified an increase in macrosomia (birthweight ≥ 4000 g) incidence (OR; 2.09, 2.01,1.92, respectively). Conclusions: The guidelines of the various professional committees, being based on consensus and expert opinion, show major discrepancies in their ability to identify women with GDM and their capacity to predict adverse pregnancy outcome. Only evidence-based criteria derived from reliable and consistent scientific data will eliminate the confusion caused in clinical practice. © 2005 Diabetes UK.
Authors & Co-Authors
Agarwal, Mukesh M.
United Arab Emirates, Al Ain
United Arab Emirates University
Dhatt, Gurdeep Singh
United Arab Emirates, Al Ain
Tawam Hospital
Punnoset, J.
United Arab Emirates, Al Ain
Al Ain Hospital
Koster, Gertrude
United Arab Emirates, Al Ain
Tawam Hospital
Statistics
Citations: 103
Authors: 4
Affiliations: 3
Identifiers
Doi:
10.1111/j.1464-5491.2005.01706.x
ISSN:
07423071
Research Areas
Health System And Policy
Maternal And Child Health
Noncommunicable Diseases
Sexual And Reproductive Health
Study Design
Cross Sectional Study
Cohort Study
Case-Control Study
Participants Gender
Female