Comparing Different Diagnostic Guidelines for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in Relation to Birthweight in Sri Lankan Women
Open accessAbstract
Introduction While the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria is widely adopted in many countries, clinicians have questioned the applicability of these diagnostic thresholds for different races/ethnicities. We first compared the prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) diagnosed with different criteria including IADPSG, World Health Organization (WHO) 1999 and Sri Lankan national guidelines, and subsequently related individual guidelines-specific GDM prevalence to offspring birthweight in Sri Lanka. Methods We retrospectively collected data on singleton pregnancies (n=795) from two tertiary hospitals in Sri Lanka. We applied three diagnostic guidelines to define GDM, namely IADPSG criteria, the Sri Lankan national and WHO 1999 guidelines. We calculated the age- and first booking BMI-adjusted prevalence rates of GDM and assessed the association of guidelines-specific GDM with birthweight. Results The age- and first booking BMI-adjusted GDM prevalence rates were 31.2 %, 28.0% and 13.1% for IADPSG criteria, Sri Lankan national and WHO 1999 guidelines, respectively. The IADPSG criteria identified 90 distinctive GDM cases at a lower cut-off of fasting glucose (from 5.1 to 5.5 mmol/L) while Sri Lankan national guideline identified 15 distinctive GDM cases at a lower cut-off for 2-hour glucose (from 7.8 to 8.4 mmol/L). After adjusting for age, GDM diagnosed by IADPSG criteria was associated with higher birthweight [90.8 g, 95% CI: 10.8, 170.9], while the associations for GDM diagnosed either by Sri Lankan national or WHO 1999 guidelines were not significant. Conclusion Adopting the IADPSG criteria for diagnosing GDM may be important in Sri Lankan pregnant population.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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 Sri Lanka, after adopting IADPSG criteria, total GDM prevalence was 31.2%.
“After adopting the IADPSG criteria to diagnose GDM, the total prevalence of the disease was 31.2% [218].”
From Evolution of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus across Continents in 21st Century (2022) · cites this paper as [218]
The Results (Table 1; page not provided) report 31.2% GDM prevalence under IADPSG criteria among 795 pregnant women at two Sri Lankan hospitals. The paper does not report prevalence after Sri Lanka adopted those criteria nationwide; the Discussion says further studies are needed before changing current guidelines. (LLM, conf=0.87)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
McIntyre, H. D., Jensen, D. M., Jensen, R. C., Kyhl, H. B., Jensen, T. K., Glintborg, D., & Andersen, M. (2018) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc17-2393 · Cited by 81 · see citing works
Sudasinghe, B. H., Ginige, P. S., & Wijeyaratne, C. N. (2016) · Ceylon Medical Journal · doi:10.4038/cmj.v61i4.8379 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 15
- [1]Metzger BE Gabbe SG Persson B Buchanan TA Catalano PA Damm P. International association of diabetes and pregnancy study groups recommendations on the diagnosis and classification of hyperglycemia in pregnancy. Diabetes Care (2010) 33: 676– 82. 10.2337/dc09-1848 20190296 PMC2827530 · DOI · Paper page
- [2]World Health Organization Diagnostic Criteria and Classification of Hyperglycaemia First Detected in Pregnancy. Geneva: World Health Organization (2013). 24199271
- [3]Weinert LS. International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups recommendations on the diagnosis and classification of hyperglycemia in pregnancy: comment to the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups Consensus Panel. Diabetes Care (2010) 33: e97; author reply e98. 10.2337/dc10-0544 20587717 · DOI
- [4]Benhalima K Mathieu C Damm P Van Assche A Devlieger R Desoye G. A proposal for the use of uniform diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes in Europe: an opinion paper by the European Board & College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (EBCOG). Diabetologia (2015) 58: 1422– 9. 10.1007/s00125-015-3615-7. 25952480 · DOI · Paper page
- [5]Benhalima K Van Crombrugge P Moyson C Verhaeghe J Vandeginste S Verlaenen H. The sensitivity and specificity of the glucose challenge test in a universal two-step screening strategy for gestational diabetes mellitus using the 2013 World Health Organization Criteria. Diabetes Care (2018) 41: e111– 2. 10.2337/dc18-0556 29748432 · DOI
- [7]Bellamy L Casas JP Hingorani AD Williams D. Type 2 diabetes mellitus after gestational diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet (2009) 373: 1773– 9. 10.1016/s0140-6736(09)60731-5. 19465232 · DOI · Paper page
- [8]Herath H Herath R Wickremasinghe R. Gestational diabetes mellitus and risk of type 2 diabetes 10 years after the index pregnancy in Sri Lankan women-A community based retrospective cohort study. PLoS ONE (2017) 12: e0179647. 10.1371/journal.pone.0179647 28644881 PMC5482451 · DOI
- [9]Illangasekera U. Impact of new diagnostic criteria for diabetes on its prevalence in a hospital population. Ceylon Med J. (2000) 45: 45– 6. 10.4038/cmj.v45i1.7966 11006628 · DOI
- [10]Dahanayaka NJ Agampodi SB Ranasinghe OR Jayaweera PM Wickramasinghe WA Adhikari AN. Inadequacy of the risk factor based approach to detect gestational diabetes mellitus. Ceylon Med J. (2012) 57: 5– 9. 10.4038/cmj.v57i1.4193 22453704 · DOI
- [11]Nallaperumal S Bhavadharini B Mahalakshmi MM Maheswari K Jalaja R Moses A. Comparison of the world health organization and the International association of diabetes and pregnancy study groups criteria in diagnosing gestational diabetes mellitus in South Indians. Indian J Endocrinol Metab. (2013) 17: 906– 9. 10.4103/2230-8210.117241 24083175 PMC3784877 · DOI
- [12]Nayak PK Mitra S Sahoo JP Daniel M Mathew A Padma A. Feto-maternal outcomes in women with and without gestational diabetes mellitus according to the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) diagnostic criteria. Diabetes Metab Syndr. (2013) 7: 206– 9. 10.1016/j.dsx.2013.10.017 24290085 · DOI
- [13]Tutino GE Tam WH Yang X Chan JC Lao TT Ma RC. Diabetes and pregnancy: perspectives from Asia. Diabet Med. (2014) 31: 302– 18. 10.1111/dme.12396 24417604 · DOI
- [14]Gopalakrishnan V Singh R Pradeep Y Kapoor D Rani AK Pradhan S. Evaluation of the prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus in North Indians using the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study groups (IADPSG) criteria. J Postgrad Med. (2015) 61: 155– 8. 10.4103/0022-3859.159306 26119433 PMC4943402 · DOI
- [17]Management of Diabetes during Pregnancy (2014). Management of Diabetes during Pregnancy. Sri Lanka Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. Available online at: https://sljog.sljol.info/article/10.4038/sljog.v36i1.6975/galley/5387/download. · DOI
- [18]Li LJ Tan KH Aris IM Chong YS Saw SM Gluckman P. Gestational retinal microvasculature and the risk of 5 year postpartum abnormal glucose metabolism. Diabetologia (2017) 60: 2368– 76. 10.1007/s00125-017-4441-x 28939944 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Evolution of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus across Continents in 21st Century
Dłuski, D. F., Ruszała, M., Rudziński, G., Pożarowska, K., Brzuszkiewicz, K., & Leszczyńska-Gorzelak, B. (2022) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph192315804 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
- Authors
- Dias, T., Siraj, S. H. M., Aris, I. M., Li, L.-J., & Tan, K. H.
- Affiliations
- University of Colombo (LK)
- Teaching Hospital Batticaloa (LK)
- Harvard University (US)
- Singapore National Eye Center (SG)
- SingHealth Duke-NUS Academic Medical Centre (SG)
- Corresponding author
- Li, Ling-Jun
- Venue
- Frontiers in Endocrinology
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2018-11-15
- Volume
- 9
- Pages
- 682-682
- ISSN
- 1664-2392 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC6262349
- OpenAlex
- W2901437373
- Cited by
- 9
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1
- FWCI
- 0.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Frontiers in Endocrinology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- National University of Singapore (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- National Medical Research Council (NMRC/CG/C008A/2017_KKH, NMRC TA/0027/2014)
- 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 › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Birth, Development, and Health
- Keywords
- gestational diabetes mellitus, diagnostic criteria, IADPSG criteria, birth weight, GDM prevalence, Sri Lanka
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