Cited by 46Gestational Diabetes Research and ManagementPregnancy and Medication ImpactDiabetes Management and Research

Glucose Targets in Pregnant Women With Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Prutsky, Gabriela J., Domecq, Juan Pablo, Wang, Zhen, Carranza Leon, Barbara G., Elraiyah, Tarig, Nabhan, Mohammed, Sundaresh, Vishnu, Vella, Adrian +2 more·2013·The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Glucose-lowering treatments are used during pregnancy to reduce the risk for complications in the mother and offspring, yet treatment targets have not been established. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to appraise and summarize the available evidence regarding the association between different blood glucose targets during pregnancy and fetal and maternal outcomes. METHODS: We searched Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, PsycInfo, and CINAHL through May 2011 for randomized trials and observational studies that enrolled women with diabetes during pregnancy and reported planned or achieved glucose targets. We used random-effects meta-regression models to estimate the odds ratio for the association of outcomes of interest and glucose targets. When possible, we adjusted for diabetes type, trimester, and diabetes treatment. RESULTS: We included 34 studies enrolling 9433 women. The studies had moderate to high risk of bias due to evidence of reporting bias and insufficient adjustment for important covariates, particularly maternal body mass index. A fasting glucose target of <90 mg/dL was the most commonly reported and the one most strongly associated with reduced risk of macrosomia (odds ratio = 0.53, 95% confidence interval = 0.31-0.90, P = .02) for women with gestational diabetes during the third trimester. For type 1 and type 2 diabetes, and for pre- and postprandial targets, data were sparse and inconclusive. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence warranting very low confidence in the estimates suggests that a fasting glucose target of <90 mg/dL is associated with a lower risk of macrosomia and other outcomes of different importance in women with gestational diabetes. Whether this target can be extrapolated to women with pregestational diabetes or whether targets above or below this threshold offer a better benefit/risk balance remains unclear.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1210/jc.2013-2461

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • A cutoff point of <90 mg/dL for preprandial value with other meals was associated with a similar reduction in risk but did not reach statistical significance (odds ratio = 0.69, 95% confidence interval = 0.17-2.94, P = .58).

    “A cutoff point of <90 mg/dL (5.0 mmol/L) for preprandial value with other meals was associated with a similar reduction in risk but it did not reach statistical significance, likely due to the smaller sample size of that subgroup (odds ratio = 0.69, 95% confidence interval = 0.17–2.94, P = .58).”
  • The analysis was associated with significant heterogeneity.

    “The analysis was associated with significant heterogeneity.”
  • The effect of the 90 mg/dL fasting plasma glucose cutoff was mainly demonstrated in women with gestational diabetes during the third trimester.

    “This effect was mainly demonstrated in women with gestational diabetes during the third trimester.”
  • The systematic review identified 34 original studies enrolling 9433 women.

    “The review identified 34 original studies enrolling 9433 women (15 randomized controlled trials, 18 cohort studies, and 1 case-control study).”
  • Data in women with type 1 and type 2 diabetes and for postprandial targets were sparse.

    “Data in women with type 1 and type 2 diabetes and for postprandial targets were sparse.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Prutsky, G. J., Domecq, J. P., Wang, Z., Carranza Leon, B. G., Elraiyah, T., Nabhan, M., Sundaresh, V., Vella, A., Montori, V. M., & Murad, M. H.
Affiliations
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
  • Henry Ford Hospital (US)
  • Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center Shreveport (US)
Corresponding author
Murad, M. Hassan
Venue
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism
Published
2013-11
Volume
98
Issue
11
Pages
4319-4324
ISSN
  • 0021-972X (ISSN-L)
  • 1945-7197
OpenAlex
W2049244274
Cited by
46
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 4 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 1
FWCI
0.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Gestational Diabetes Research and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Pregnancy and Medication Impact
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
Keywords
glycemic targets, gestational diabetes mellitus, maternal diabetes, fasting blood glucose, macrosomia, fetal outcomes, maternal outcomes, pregestational diabetes, type 1 diabetes, type 2 diabetes, glycemic control in pregnancy
MeSH terms
Blood Glucose, Female, Humans, Hyperglycemia, Hypoglycemic Agents, Pregnancy, Pregnancy in Diabetics

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