Cited by 4Gestational Diabetes Research and ManagementDiabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins

Diagnosis of gestational diabetes: Evidence and pitfalls

Open access
Wong, Tang, Immanuel, Jincy, Wong, Vincent W., Barnes, Robyn, Simmons, David·2025·Best Practice & Research Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism

Abstract

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), defined as hyperglycaemia first recognised during pregnancy, is an important clinical entity, especially with its impact on pregnancy outcomes and the increased risk of metabolic disease for both mother and child in their later lives. However, the definition and diagnosis of GDM have continued to evolve over the past 50 years, and this has sometimes caused confusion for clinicians. Currently, different countries adopt different strategies in diagnosing GDM, despite a previous attempt in 2008 to decide on a universally acceptable diagnostic algorithm. In this review, the biological principles that underpin dysglycaemia in pregnancy, the evolution of diagnostic standards for GDM over the years, reasons for the different diagnostic criteria and recognition of early versus late GDM will be discussed. The controversies and uncertainties, pitfalls and alternate ways to diagnose GDM will also be explored.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.beem.2025.102069

Cites

114 of 114 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. International Diabetes Federation. IDF Atlas; 2025 [cited 2025 19/6/2025]; 11th edition. Available from: 〈https://diabetesatlas.org/〉.
  2. O'Sullivan, 1964, Criteria for the oral glucose tolerance test in pregnancy, Diabetes, 13, 278
  3. American Diabetes Association Professional Practice, C, 2024, 2. Diagnosis and classification of diabetes: standards of care in diabetes—2025., Diabetes Care, 48, S27

Cited by

Still being checked.

Authors
Wong, T., Immanuel, J., Wong, V. W., Barnes, R., & Simmons, D.
Affiliations
  • Bankstown Lidcombe Hospital (AU)
  • Texas Woman's University (US)
  • Liverpool Hospital (AU)
  • South Western Sydney Local Health District (AU)
  • Western Sydney University (AU)
Corresponding author
Simmons, David
Venue
Best Practice & Research Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2025-12
Volume
39
Issue
6
Pages
102069
ISSN
1521-690X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4416580328
Cited by
4
References
114
Citations by year
2026: 4
FWCI
4.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Best Practice & Research Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Gestational Diabetes Research and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Keywords
gestational diabetes mellitus, GDM diagnosis, diagnostic criteria, diagnostic algorithm, hyperglycemia in pregnancy, diagnostic pitfalls, pregnancy outcomes
MeSH terms
Blood Glucose, Female, Glucose Tolerance Test, Humans, Pregnancy, Diabetes, Gestational

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review