Cited by 60Gestational Diabetes Research and ManagementDiabetes Management and ResearchPregnancy and preeclampsia studies

Early Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Screening With Glycated Hemoglobin: A Systematic Review

Kattini, Ribal, Hummelen, Ruben, Kelly, Len·2020·Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada

Abstract

Objective This review sought to examine the association of HbA 1c levels Methods A search of Medline and EMBASE was conducted for the period of January 1, 2000 to July 9, 2019 and the terms: "gestational diabetes or pregnancy diabetes mellitus" and "glycosylated hemoglobin or glycated hemoglobin A" and "pregnancy trimester, first, or first-trimester pregnancy," "screening or prenatal screening," "prenatal diagnosis or early diagnosis or prediction," "retrospective studies or prospective studies." Quality of evidence was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Inclusion criteria were: measurement of HbA 1c 1c levels below 6.5%. The primary outcome evaluated was the development of GDM. Secondary outcomes were adverse pregnancy outcomes, including large-for-gestational-age birth weight, macrosomia, preterm birth, neonatal and perinatal death, congenital anomaly, preeclampsia, shoulder dystocia, and cesarean section. Results We screened 121 relevant abstracts. Thirty-two studies qualified for a full review, of which 11 met the eligibility criteria. All studies were assessed as high quality and found an increased risk of GDM with HbA 1c levels >5.7. Levels >6.0 identified all patients who developed GDM. Adverse pregnancy outcomes were associated with elevated HbA 1c levels in 4 of 6 studies and included preeclampsia, induced labour, shoulder dystocia, cesarean section, large-for-gestational-age birth weight, macrosomia, congenital anomalies, and perinatal death. Two studies fou…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jogc.2019.12.015

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Early abnormal glucose metabolism, defined as a fasting glucose threshold of 110 mg/dL or an A1C of 5.9%, may identify individuals at higher risk of adverse pregnancy and neonatal outcomes, more likely to need insulin treatment, and at high risk of a later GDM diagnosis.

    “Early abnormal glucose metabolism, defi ned as a fasting glucose threshold of 110 mg/dL (6.1 mmol/L) or an A1C of 5.9% (41 mmol/mol), may identify individuals who are at higher risk of adverse pregnancy and neonatal outcomes (preeclampsia, macrosomia, shoulder dystocia, and perinatal death), are more likely to need insulin treatment, and are at high risk of a later GDM diagnosis (189 -194).”
  • Early abnormal glucose metabolism, defined as a fasting glucose threshold of 110 mg/dL or an A1C of 5.9%, may identify individuals who are at higher risk of adverse pregnancy and neonatal outcomes (preeclampsia, macrosomia, shoulder dystocia, and perinatal death), are at high risk of a later GDM diagnosis, and are more likely to need insulin treatment.

    “Early abnormal glucose metabolism, defined as a fasting glucose threshold of 110 mg/dL (6.1 mmol/L) or an A1C of 5.9% (41 mmol/mol), may identify individuals who are at higher risk of adverse pregnancy and neonatal outcomes (preeclampsia, macrosomia, shoulder dystocia, and perinatal death), are at high risk of a later GDM diagnosis, and are more likely to need insulin treatment (174-176).”
  • First-trimester glycated hemoglobin assessment is an additional prognostic marker and should not be analyzed separately.

    “The first-trimester glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) assessment is pointed out to be an additional prognostic marker and should not be analyzed separately.”
  • First-trimester glycated hemoglobin has insufficient sensitivity and specificity and may not detect the whole population of patients.

    “Its insufficient sensitivity and specificity may not detect the whole population of patients [10,11].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kattini, R., Hummelen, R., & Kelly, L.
Affiliations
  • NOSM University (CA)
  • Sioux Lookout First Nations Health Authority (CA)
Corresponding author
Kelly, Len
Venue
Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-11
Volume
42
Issue
11
Pages
1379-1384
ISSN
1701-2163 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3015610276
Cited by
60
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 2
FWCI
1.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada (publishedVersion)
  • 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 › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Pregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Keywords
gestational diabetes mellitus, HbA1c, early pregnancy screening, HbA1c thresholds, adverse pregnancy outcomes, macrosomia, preeclampsia, shoulder dystocia, cesarean section, perinatal death, congenital malformations
MeSH terms
Female, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Outcome, Diabetes, Gestational, Premature Birth

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