Gestational diabetes in Korea: Temporal trends in prevalence, treatment, and short-term consequences from a national health insurance claims database between 2012 and 2016
Abstract
Aims This population-based cross-sectional study aimed to investigate recent trends in the prevalence and treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in Korea. We also investigated trends in annual prevalence rate of pregnancy-induced hypertension (PIH) and cesarean section (C-section) in GDM patients. Methods We used data from the Health Insurance Review and Assessment-National Patient Sample (HIRA-NPS) database, 2012-2016. Non-GDM (n = 53,698) and GDM (n = 7956) patient data were analyzed for each year. Results The annual increase in the prevalence of GDM was 11.1% over 2012-2016, with a significant continuously increasing trend (p < 0.0001). Age-stratified analysis showed that the annual prevalence of GDM significantly increased in patients below 40 years of age, but was not statistically significant as an increasing trend in patients above 40 years of age. Annual PIH prevalence rate among GDM women showed decreasing trend but was not statistically significant. An annual increase in C-section rate above 5% in GDM patients was statistically significant in both unadjusted and adjusted for age and PIH models. Conclusions The prevalence of GDM in Korean women and C-section rates in women with GDM showed a significantly increasing trend, 2012-2016. There is a need for further efforts to monitor this trend and to identify associated risk factors for GDM in Korean women.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In South Korea, Jung et al. performed a cross-sectional study between 2012 and 2016 and assessed GDM occurrence at 11.1%.
“Between 2012 and 2016 Jung et al. performed a cross-sectional study on the basis of which the GDM occurrence was assessed at 11.1% [222].”
From Evolution of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus across Continents in 21st Century (2022) · cites this paper as [222]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 29 · Cited by 28
- Authors
- Jung, C.-H., Jung, S.-H., Choi, D., Kim, B.-Y., Kim, C.-H., & Mok, J.-O.
- Affiliations
- Soonchunhyang University (KR)
- CHA University (KR)
- Corresponding author
- Mok, Ji-Oh
- Venue
- Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2021-01
- Volume
- 171
- Pages
- 108586
- ISSN
- 0168-8227 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3111848504
- Cited by
- 28
- References
- 29
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1
- FWCI
- 1.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Soonchunhyang University
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Gestational Diabetes Research and Management
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Pregnancy and Medication Impact
- Keywords
- gestational diabetes mellitus, prevalence trends, gestational hypertension, cesarean section, GDM treatment, Korean women, age-stratified analysis, risk factors
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Cesarean Section, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Humans, National Health Programs, Pregnancy, Risk Factors, Prevalence, Databases, Factual, Diabetes, Gestational, History, 21st Century, Republic of Korea
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