Cited by 658Gestational Diabetes Research and ManagementDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsMaternal and Neonatal Healthcare

Trends in the prevalence of preexisting diabetes and gestational diabetes mellitus among a racially/ethnically diverse population of pregnant women, 1999–2005

Lawrence, Jean M., Contreras, Richard, Chen, Wansu, Sacks, David A.·2008·Diabetes Care

Abstract

OBJECTIVE—The purpose of this study was to assess changes in the prevalence of preexisting diabetes (diabetes antedating pregnancy) and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) from 1999 through 2005. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—In this retrospective study of 175,249 women aged 13–58 years with 209,287 singleton deliveries of ≥20 weeks’ gestation from 1999 through 2005 in all Kaiser Permanente hospitals in southern California, information from clinical databases and birth certificates was used to estimate the prevalence of preexisting diabetes and GDM. RESULTS—Preexisting diabetes was identified in 2,784 (1.3%) of all pregnancies, rising from an age- and race/ethnicity-adjusted prevalence of 0.81 per 100 in 1999 to 1.82 per 100 in 2005 (Ptrend < 0.001). Significant increases were observed in all age-groups and all racial/ethnic groups. After women with preexisting diabetes were excluded, GDM was identified in 15,121 (7.6%) of 199,298 screened pregnancies. The age- and race/ethnicity-adjusted GDM prevalence remained constant at 7.5 per 100 in 1999 to 7.4 per 100 in 2005 (Ptrend = 0.07). Among all deliveries to women with either form of diabetes, 10% were due to preexisting diabetes in 1999, rising to 21% in 2005, with GDM accounting for the remainder. CONCLUSIONS—The stable prevalence of GDM and increase in the prevalence of preexisting diabetes were independent of changes in the age and race/ethnicity of the population. The increase in preexisting diabetes, particularly among younger women early in their reproductive years, is of concern.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2337/dc07-2345

Cites

27 of 27 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lawrence, J. M., Contreras, R., Chen, W., & Sacks, D. A.
Affiliations
Kaiser Permanente (US)
Venue
Diabetes Care
Published
2008-05-01
Volume
31
Issue
5
Pages
899-904
ISSN
  • 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-5548
OpenAlex
W2126878764
Cited by
658
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 40 · 2019: 42 · 2018: 48 · 2017: 37 · 2016: 42 · 2015: 57 · 2014: 47 · 2013: 47 · 2012: 66
FWCI
44.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Diabetes Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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 › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Maternal and Neonatal Healthcare
Keywords
pregestational diabetes, gestational diabetes mellitus, prevalence trends, pregnant women, racial and ethnic diversity, young women, Kaiser Permanente, diabetes in pregnancy
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, California, Diabetes Mellitus, Female, Group Practice, Humans, Middle Aged, Pregnancy, Probability, Retrospective Studies, Prevalence, 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