Evolution of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus across Continents in 21st Century

After adoption of IADPSG standards in Australia, the incidence of gestational diabetes mellitus increased from 20 to 75%.

“Researchers from Australia showed that after the adoption of the IADPSG standards the incidence of GDM increased from 20 to 75%, but it was also justified by improvements in the potential long-term benefits and perinatal morbidity [17,18,19].”

• cites [17] Saeedi, 2021, Increasing prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus when implementing the IADPSG criteria: A systematic review and meta-analysis, Diabetes Res. Clin. Pract. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites [18] Laafira, 2016, Impact of the new IADPSG gestational diabetes diagnostic criteria on pregnancy outcomes in Western Australia, Aust. N. Z. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites [19] Brown, 2017, Application of One-Step IADPSG Versus Two-Step Diagnostic Criteria for Gestational Diabetes in the Real World: Impact on Health Services, Clinical Care, and Outcomes, Curr. Diab. Rep. sourceDisputed

  In the 'Prevalence of GDM With the Application of IADPSG Criteria' section (Table 2; page unavailable), the Western Australia row reports prevalence of 3.4% under regional criteria and 3.5% under IADPSG criteria. That contradicts the attributed increase from 20% to 75%, although the paper reports increases in other settings. (LLM, conf=0.88)

  Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Even after changing criteria to WHO/IADPSG 2013, the overall prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus in Africa is still unknown.

“Even after changing the criteria for a GDM diagnosis in the WHO/IADPSG 2013, the overall prevalence of GDM is still unknown.”

• cites [30] Natamba, B.K., Namara, A.A., and Nyirenda, M.J. (2019). Burden, risk factors and maternal and offspring outcomes of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA): A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 19. sourceDisputed

  The Results section estimates overall GDM prevalence in sub-Saharan Africa at 9% (95% CI, 7–12%) and gives a separate estimate of 16% (11–21%) for studies using IADPSG or WHO 2013 criteria. The Background says prevalence in the general population was largely unknown before this review, but the paper does not present it as still unknown after its analysis. (LLM, conf=0.88)

  Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
• cites [31] Macaulay, S., Dunger, D.B., and Norris, S.A. (2014). Gestational diabetes mellitus in Africa: A systematic review. PLoS ONE, 9. sourceSupported

In Thailand, an increase in GDM prevalence from 22.2% to 32.76% was observed when changing from C&C criteria to NDGG criteria.

“In Thailand, an increase in the prevalence of GDM from 22.2% to 32.76% was observed when changing from the C&C criteria to the NDGG criteria.”

• cites [229] Luewan, 2018, Comparison of the Screening Tests for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus between “one-Step” and “two-Step” Methods among Thai Pregnant Women, Obstet. Gynecol. Int. sourceDisputed

  The Results (page unavailable) report 32.0% GDM prevalence with one-step screening versus 10.3% with two-step screening among Thai women, not 22.2% versus 32.76%. The Introduction identifies the compared criteria as IADPSG and ACOG, not C&C and NDGG. (LLM, conf=0.88)

  Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

In Thailand, the most valuable screening test for GDM was the 100 g, two-hour OGTT.

“The researchers showed that the most valuable screening test in Thailand was the 100 g, two-hour OGTT [229].”

• cites [229] Luewan, 2018, Comparison of the Screening Tests for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus between “one-Step” and “two-Step” Methods among Thai Pregnant Women, Obstet. Gynecol. Int. sourceDisputed

  The Methods describe the 100 g OGTT as part of a two-step approach, with measurements through three hours; the two-hour OGTT uses 75 g. The Discussion questions routine use of the 75 g one-step test in this Thai clinic, but does not identify a 100 g, two-hour OGTT as the most valuable test in Thailand. (LLM, conf=0.89)

  Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

In 2013 Oman introduced new criteria to detect GDM.

“In 2013 Oman introduced new criteria to detect GDM.”

• cites [232] Subhi, 2021, Prevalence of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Using the Latest World Health Organization Diagnostic Criteria among Omani Women in Muscat, Oman, Oman. Med. J. sourceDisputed

  The Introduction says Oman adopted its new national GDM protocol in March 2015, not 2013. The protocol was based on the 2013 WHO criteria; 2013 dates the WHO criteria, not their introduction in Oman. No page number is supplied in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.90)

  Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

In the same Omani study, GDM incidence dropped to 26.4% when applying new WHO criteria.

“It dropped to 26.4% when applying the new WHO criteria [232].”

• cites [232] Subhi, 2021, Prevalence of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Using the Latest World Health Organization Diagnostic Criteria among Omani Women in Muscat, Oman, Oman. Med. J. sourceDisputed

  The Results and Discussion state the opposite: GDM incidence was 48.5% under the new WHO criteria and 26.4% under the old criteria. Applying the new criteria increased, rather than decreased, the reported incidence. (LLM, conf=0.95)

  Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

In Bahrain in 2012, GDM was assessed at 10.1%.

“In 2012, GDM was assessed at 10.1%.”

• cites [239] Nagalla, 2005, A population-based screening for gestational diabetes mellitus in non-diabetic women in Bahrain, Ann. Saudi Med. sourceDisputed

  The Methods describe screening in Bahrain from January 2001 to December 2002, not in 2012. The Results report GDM in 13.3% of the screened non-diabetic pregnant women, rather than 10.1%. The supplied copy gives no page numbers for these sections. (LLM, conf=0.89)

  Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Untreated glucose intolerance increases the risk of maternal and neonatal complications.

“Untreated glucose intolerance increases the risk of maternal and neonatal complications.”

• cites [2] McIntyre, 2016, Issues with the Diagnosis and Classification of Hyperglycemia in Early Pregnancy, Diabetes Care sourcePartly supported

  The main text (pp. 53–54) reports that elevated early-pregnancy HbA1c was associated with maternal and neonatal complications, including preeclampsia, congenital anomalies, and perinatal death. It does not establish that leaving glucose intolerance untreated increases those risks; the authors note a lack of trial data on the benefits of detecting and treating milder early-pregnancy hyperglycemia. (LLM, conf=0.87)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Laurie et al. confirmed an almost quadrupled prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus in Australia between 2010 and 2019.

“Laurie et al. confirmed the almost quadrupled prevalence of GDM between 2010 and 2019 in Australia.”

• cites [20] Laurie, J.G., and McIntyre, H.D. (2020). A Review of the Current Status of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in Australia-The Clinical Impact of Changing Population Demographics and Diagnostic Criteria on Prevalence. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 17. sourcePartly supported

  The Prevalence section (page unavailable) supports a substantial rise in Australian GDM diagnoses, reporting about 41,000 diagnoses in 2019. It describes a doubling of the number of affected women over the last decade, but does not establish that prevalence nearly quadrupled specifically between 2010 and 2019. (LLM, conf=0.78)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

The pooled prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus in Africa was 13.61% (95% CI: 10.99-16.23; I2 = 96.1%).

“According to them, the pooled prevalence of GDM in Africa was 13.61% (OR: 95%CI: 10.99–16.23; I2 = 96.1%)”

• cites [34] Muche, 2019, Prevalence and determinants of gestational diabetes mellitus in Africa based on the updated international diagnostic criteria: A systematic review and meta-analysis, Arch. Public Health sourceSupported

For all studies in Africa, the gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence was higher, as confirmed by Olumodeji et al.

“One thing was obvious: for all of the studies, the GDM prevalence was higher, which was confirmed by Olumodeji et al. [33].”

• cites [33] Olumodeji, 2020, Implementing the 2013 WHO diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus in a Rural Nigerian Population, Pan Afr. Med. J. sourcePartly supported

  The Discussion reports higher GDM prevalence under the 2013 WHO criteria in this rural Nigerian study and in an Ekiti study. It does not confirm a higher prevalence for all African studies: it notes that a study in Jos, Nigeria found no significant difference between the 1999 and 2013 criteria. (LLM, conf=0.86)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

In Gabon, advanced maternal age was connected with gestational diabetes mellitus only with high parity.

“Additionally, their data showed that advanced maternal age was connected with GDM only with high parity [41].”

• cites [41] Lendoye, 2022, Prevalence and factors associated to gestational diabetes mellitus among pregnant women in Libreville: A cross-sectional study, Pan Afr. Med. J. sourceSupported

In sub-Saharan Africa, HIV infection was not statistically significantly associated with gestational diabetes mellitus.

“Other parameters (e.g., HIV infection) were not statistically significant [30].”

• cites [30] Natamba, B.K., Namara, A.A., and Nyirenda, M.J. (2019). Burden, risk factors and maternal and offspring outcomes of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA): A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 19. sourceSupported

In Central Africa-Cameroon, the highest prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus is 20.4% using WHO/AIDPSG 2013.

“Egbe et al., using WHO/AIDPSG 2013, confirmed in their study that the highest prevalence of GDM is in Central Africa-Cameroon (20.4%).”

• cites [37] Egbe, 2018, Prevalence and risk factors of gestational diabetes mellitus in a population of pregnant women attending three health facilities in Limbe, Cameroon: A cross-sectional study, Pan Afr. Med. J. sourcePartly supported

  The Discussion (Prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus; page not provided) reports a high GDM prevalence in the Limbe, Cameroon study, but gives 20.5%, not 20.4%, and says the study used IADPSG criteria rather than a combined WHO/IADPSG 2013 standard. It does not establish that Cameroon had the highest prevalence in Central Africa. (LLM, conf=0.88)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

The lowest gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence in Africa was in Northern Africa at 7.57% (95% CI: 5.89-9.25).

“The lowest prevalence was in Northern Africa at 7.57% (95% CI: 5.89–9.25)”

• cites [34] Muche, 2019, Prevalence and determinants of gestational diabetes mellitus in Africa based on the updated international diagnostic criteria: A systematic review and meta-analysis, Arch. Public Health sourceSupported

On the African continent, several diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus are used, including WHO 1985, WHO 1999, WHO 2006, CC criteria, ADA 2003/2004, WHO/IADPSG 2013, or individual protocols.

“On the African continent, a few ways diagnosing GDM diagnosis have still exist. The WHO 1985, WHO 1999, WHO 2006, CC criteria, ADA 2003/2004, WHO/IADPSG 2013 or individual protocols are taken into account [30,31].”

• cites [30] Natamba, B.K., Namara, A.A., and Nyirenda, M.J. (2019). Burden, risk factors and maternal and offspring outcomes of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA): A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 19. sourceSupported
• cites [31] Macaulay, S., Dunger, D.B., and Norris, S.A. (2014). Gestational diabetes mellitus in Africa: A systematic review. PLoS ONE, 9. sourcePartly supported

  The Results (Study Characteristics, Table 3; page not provided) document African studies using WHO 1985, WHO 1999, Carpenter and Coustan criteria, and an institutional protocol. They do not document use of WHO 2006 or ADA 2003/2004 criteria, and the Discussion (page not provided) explicitly says none of the reviewed studies used WHO 2013 or IADPSG criteria. (LLM, conf=0.90)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

The high gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence in Central Africa-Cameroon is connected with an epidemic of obesity caused by incorrect dietary habits and low physical activity.

“These results were connected with an epidemic of obesity caused by incorrect dietary habits and a low level of physical activity.”

• cites [37] Egbe, 2018, Prevalence and risk factors of gestational diabetes mellitus in a population of pregnant women attending three health facilities in Limbe, Cameroon: A cross-sectional study, Pan Afr. Med. J. sourcePartly supported

  The Discussion (Risk factors for gestational diabetes mellitus; page not provided) links the study’s high GDM prevalence to increased BMI and suggests dietary habits contribute to obesity. It also says very few women lived a sedentary lifestyle, so low physical activity does not explain the high BMI and GDM in this study. (LLM, conf=0.88)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

The pooled prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus in sub-Saharan Africa was 14.28% (95% CI: 11.39-17.16; I2 = 96.4%).

“and 14.28% (95% CI: 11.39–17.16; I2 = 96.4%) in subSaharan countries.”

• cites [34] Muche, 2019, Prevalence and determinants of gestational diabetes mellitus in Africa based on the updated international diagnostic criteria: A systematic review and meta-analysis, Arch. Public Health sourceSupported

Using the one-step strategy, gestational diabetes mellitus was diagnosed in double the number of women compared with the two-step method.

“The results showed that using the one-step strategy, GDM was diagnosed in doubled number of women in comparison with the two-step method.”

• cites [44] Hillier, 2021, A Pragmatic Randomized Clinical Trial of Gestational Diabetes Screening, N. Engl. J. Med. sourceSupported

In North Africa, the weighted incidence of gestational diabetes mellitus was 13.5% (95% CI: 7.4-20.9, I2 = 98.9%).

“The weighted incidence of GDM in North Africa was 13.5% (95% CI: 7.4–20.9, I2 = 98.9%).”

• cites [40] Abdo, 2021, Prevalence of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in the Middle East and North Africa, 2000–2019: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Meta-Regression, Front. Endocrinol. sourcePartly supported

  The Results section, “Subregional Specific Pooled GDM Prevalence,” gives the North African estimate as 13.5% (95% CI, 7.4–20.9%; I², 98.9%). It identifies this as weighted prevalence, not incidence; the cited paper therefore supports the figures but not the measure named in the claim. (LLM, conf=0.88)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

In Nigeria, hyperglycemia was positively correlated with previous history of gestational diabetes mellitus and hypertension, weight ≥90 kg, and age ≥35 years.

“They also found positive correlations between hyperglycemia and previous history of GDM and hypertension, weight ≥ 90 kg, and age ≥ 35 years [39].”

• cites [39] Nwali, S.A., Onoh, R.C., Dimejesi, I.B., Obi, V.O., Jombo, S.E., and Edenya, O.O. (2021). Universal versus selective screening for gestational diabetes mellitus among antenatal clinic attendees in Abakaliki: Using the one-step 75 gram oral glucose tolerance test. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 21. sourceSupported

In Gabon, the gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence was higher using WHO 1999 criteria (10.4%) than using WHO/IADPSG 2013 criteria (4.5%).

“They showed that the GDM prevalence was higher using the WHO 1999 (10.4%) than using the WHO/IADPSG 2013 criteria (4.5%).”

• cites [41] Lendoye, 2022, Prevalence and factors associated to gestational diabetes mellitus among pregnant women in Libreville: A cross-sectional study, Pan Afr. Med. J. sourcePartly supported

  The Discussion and Abstract Results report a higher GDM prevalence under WHO 1999 criteria than under WHO 2013 criteria. But they give the WHO 1999 figure as 10.2%, not the cited 10.4%; the 4.5% figure matches. (LLM, conf=0.94)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

When IADPSG criteria were used, the prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus in sub-Saharan Africa was approximately 16%.

“but if the IADPSG criteria were used the prevalence was approximately 16% in sub-Saharan Africa [30].”

• cites [30] Natamba, B.K., Namara, A.A., and Nyirenda, M.J. (2019). Burden, risk factors and maternal and offspring outcomes of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA): A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 19. sourceSupported

The gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence in North African countries with a maternal mortality ratio >100/100,000 live births was 32% higher than in those with an MMR ≤100/100,000.

“This prevalence was 32% higher in North African countries with a maternal mortality ratio (MMR) > 100/100,000 live births than in North African countries with an MMR ≤ 100/100,000 live births [40].”

• cites [40] Abdo, 2021, Prevalence of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in the Middle East and North Africa, 2000–2019: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Meta-Regression, Front. Endocrinol. sourceSupported

The highest gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence in Africa was in Central Africa at 20.4% (95% CI: 1.55-38.54).

“and the highest was in Central Africa at 20.4% (95% CI: 1.55–38.54) [34].”

• cites [34] Muche, 2019, Prevalence and determinants of gestational diabetes mellitus in Africa based on the updated international diagnostic criteria: A systematic review and meta-analysis, Arch. Public Health sourceSupported

Gestational diabetes mellitus is the most frequent endocrinopathy during pregnancy in Canada.

“GDM is the most frequent endocrinopathy during pregnancy in Canada [63]”

• cites [63] Amiri, 2019, The impact of diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes on its prevalence: A systematic review and meta-analysis, Diabetol. Metab. Syndr. sourcePartly supported

  The Background (page unavailable) calls GDM “one of the most common endocrinopathies during pregnancy,” supporting the general point. It does not say GDM is the single most frequent endocrinopathy, specifically in Canada. The Results (page unavailable) include Canadian GDM prevalence studies but do not compare GDM with other endocrinopathies there. (LLM, conf=0.88)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

A growing trend of gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence has been observed in Mexico.

“A growing trend of GDM prevalence has been observed [56,57,58,59,60,61].”

• cites [56] 1993, Experiencia con un programa de escrutinio de diabetes gestacional, Rev. Investig. Clin.Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites [57] 1997, Incidence of gestational diabetes in a group of women receiving treatment at the Mexican Institute of Social Security in Aguascalientes, Mexico, Arch. Med. Res.Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites [58] 2005, Gestational diabetes mellitus. Experience at a third level hospital [Diabetes mellitus gestacional. Experiencia en una institución de tercer nivel de atención], Ginecol. Obstet. Mex.Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites [59] 2011, Prediction of alterations in glucose metabolism by glucose and insulin measurements in early pregnancy, Arch. Med. Res. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites [60] Parra, 2012, The risk of gestational diabetes mellitus among Mexican women with a history of infertility and polycystic ovary syndrome, Fertil. Steril. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites [61] Huerta-Chagoya, A., Vázquez-Cárdenas, P., Moreno-Macías, H., Tapia-Maruri, L., Rodríguez-Guillén, R., López-Vite, E., García-Escalante, G., Escobedo-Aguirre, F., Parra-Covarrubias, A., and Cordero-Brieño, R. (2015). Genetic determinants for gestational diabetes mellitus and related metabolic traits in Mexican women. PLoS ONE, 10. sourceCould not verify

  The Introduction reports one Mexican GDM prevalence estimate, 12.9%, and says no nationwide prevalence has been reported. The Results describe a case-control sample, not prevalence over time. Searches for an increasing prevalence or temporal trend found no passage establishing that GDM prevalence has grown in Mexico. (LLM, conf=0.75)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

In a study among users of the Brazilian Unified Health System in Caxias do Sul, the estimated prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus was 5.4%.

“In a study performed among users of the Brazilian Unified Health System (UHS) in the city of Caxias do Sul, State of Rio Grande do Sul, the estimated prevalence of GDM was 5.4%.”

• cites [80] Madi, 2020, Gestational Diabetes in the Population Served by Brazilian Public Health Care. Prevalence and Risk Factors, Rev. Bras. Ginecol. Obstet. sourceSupported

There was no disparity between maternal and perinatal outcomes between the one-step and two-step screening strategies.

“Nevertheless, there was no disparity between maternal and perinatal outcomes, while more pregnant women were treated for GDM after diagnosis with the one-step method [44].”

• cites [44] Hillier, 2021, A Pragmatic Randomized Clinical Trial of Gestational Diabetes Screening, N. Engl. J. Med. sourceSupported

More pregnant women were treated for gestational diabetes mellitus after diagnosis with the one-step method.

“while more pregnant women were treated for GDM after diagnosis with the one-step method [44].”

• cites [44] Hillier, 2021, A Pragmatic Randomized Clinical Trial of Gestational Diabetes Screening, N. Engl. J. Med. sourceSupported

Filipina, Pacific Islander/Hawaiian, and other Asian pregnant patients had increased risk of gestational diabetes mellitus versus White women in a bivariate analysis.

“Filipina, Pacific Islander/Hawaiian, and other Asian pregnant patients had increased risk of GDM versus white women using a bivariate analysis [52].”

• cites [52] Tsai, P.J., Roberson, E., and Dye, T. (2013). Gestational diabetes and macrosomia by race/ethnicity in Hawaii. BMC Res. Notes, 6. sourceSupported

In French Guiana, the gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence was 10.3% in a prospective study.

“Similar results for GDM prevalence at 10.3% were presented by Leonco et al. in their prospective study performed in French Guiana, an overseas department of France, in South America [79].”

• cites [79] Leonco, 2021, Does Universal Screening for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Improve Neonatal Outcomes in a Socially Vulnerable Population: A Prospective Study in French Guiana, Front. Endocrinol. sourceSupported

The increase in gestational diabetes mellitus cases with the one-step method occurred because only one elevated value is required to make the diagnosis.

“This increase in the number of GDM cases occurred, due to the fact that only one elevated value is required to make the diagnosis [45].”

• cites [45] Sacks, 2012, Frequency of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus at Collaborating Centers Based on IADPSG Consensus Panel-Recommended Criteria: The Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome (HAPO) Study, Diabetes Care sourcePartly supported

  The Research Design and Methods section (p. 1) says the IADPSG criteria diagnose GDM when one or more glucose values meet a threshold. The Results (p. 1) report a 17.8% frequency under those criteria, but the paper does not compare that frequency with a prior method or establish that requiring only one elevated value caused an increase in cases. (LLM, conf=0.84)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Using the one-step 2-h 75 g OGTT, approximately 17.8% of pregnant women in the US would be classified as having gestational diabetes mellitus.

“In turn, using the one-step 2-h 75 g OGTT approximately 17.8% of pregnant women would be classified as having GDM, which would almost double the frequency of GDM in the US [4].”

• cites [4] Lende, M., and Rijhsinghani, A. (2020). Gestational Diabetes: Overview with Emphasis on Medical Management. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 17. sourceSupported

In 2017, data from four major cities in Mexico reported an overall predicted gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence of 23.7%.

“The data were collected in 4 major cities in Mexico: (Mexico City, Guadalajara, Monterrey, and Merida) in 2017, and an overall predicted GDM prevalence at the level of 23.7% was reported [54].”

• cites [54] Dainelli, 2018, Screening and Management of Gestational Diabetes in Mexico: Results from a Survey of Multilocation, Multi-Health Care Institution Practitioners, Diabetes Metab. Syndr. Obes. sourcePartly supported

  The Materials and methods section says the survey was conducted in Mexico City, Guadalajara, Monterrey, and Merida in June–July 2017. The Results section reports a total predicted GDM clinician-reported proportion of 23.7%. Calling that figure GDM prevalence omits the important qualifier that it was based on clinicians’ reports, not a directly measured population prevalence. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

In Brazil, pregnant women who were obese, ≥35 years, and those with three or more pregnancies were more likely to develop gestational diabetes mellitus than women with normal BMI, <35 years, and primiparous.

“Additionally, pregnant women who were obese, ≥35 years, and those with three or more pregnancies were more likely to develop GDM during pregnancy than women with a normal BMI, <35 years, and primiparous [80].”

• cites [80] Madi, 2020, Gestational Diabetes in the Population Served by Brazilian Public Health Care. Prevalence and Risk Factors, Rev. Bras. Ginecol. Obstet. sourcePartly supported

  The Results report higher unadjusted odds of GDM for women aged ≥35 and women with three or more pregnancies. They also report higher odds for BMI ≥25 versus BMI <25, but do not separately establish the claimed comparison of obese women with normal-BMI women. The Discussion adds that the association with three or more pregnancies lost significance after adjustment. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

In a study using IADPSG criteria, the gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence was lower in the Mediterranean diet group (14.8%) than in the control group (25.8%).

“The study performed by Melero et al. using the IADPSG criteria, analyzed the nutritional intervention, the Mediterranean diet and its influence on GDM, the results showed lower GDM prevalence in the Mediterranean diet group, than in the control group at 14.8% and 25.8%, respectively [108].”

• cites [108] Melero, V., García de la Torre, N., Assaf-Balut, C., Jiménez, I., Del Valle, L., Durán, A., Bordiú, E., Valerio, J.J., Herraiz, M.A., and Izquierdo, N. (2020). Effect of a Mediterranean Diet-Based Nutritional Intervention on the Risk of Developing Gestational Diabetes Mellitus and Other Maternal-Fetal Adverse Events in Hispanic Women Residents in Spain. Nutrients, 12. sourceSupported

The national prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus in Trinidad and Tobago was estimated at 14.5% using IADPSG/WHO 2013 criteria.

“The national prevalence in Trinidad and Tobago was estimated at 14.5% using the IADPSG/WHO 2013 criteria [97].”

• cites [97] Khan, 2020, Prevalence rates of impaired glucose tolerance and gestational diabetes mellitus amongst expectant mothers and undiagnosed diabetes mellitus in walk-in patients at health centres in North Central Trinidad, J. Fam. Med. Prim. Care sourcePartly supported

  The Discussion mentions a national prevalence of 14.5% alongside its GDM findings, but later identifies 14.5% as an International Diabetes Federation estimate for diabetes mellitus, not a national GDM estimate. The Methodology refers to WHO criteria for the study’s local GDM diagnoses; it does not say the 14.5% estimate used IADPSG/WHO 2013 criteria. No page numbers are available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

In Poland, more pregnant women were diagnosed with gestational diabetes mellitus based on the fasting glucose level.

“A study performed by Cichocka and Gumprecht found that more pregnant women were diagnosed with GDM based on the fasting glucose level [102].”

• cites [102] Cichocka, E., and Gumprecht, J. (2022). Does the Change in the Diagnostic Criteria for Gestational Diabetes in Poland Affect Maternal and Fetal Complications? A Prospective Study. Medicina, 58. sourceSupported

In Peru, mid-pregnancy obesity and family history of diabetes had increased odds ratios of gestational diabetes mellitus.

“Additionally, researchers found that mid-pregnancy obesity, and family history of diabetes, had increased odds ratios of GDM [94].”

• cites [94] Larrabure-Torrealva, G.T., Martinez, S., Luque-Fernandez, M.A., Sanchez, S.E., Mascaro, P.A., Ingar, H., Castillo, W., Zumaeta, R., Grande, M., and Motta, V. (2018). Prevalence and risk factors of gestational diabetes mellitus: Findings from a universal screening feasibility program in Lima, Peru. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 18. sourceSupported

Paraguay, Suriname, Bolivia, and Venezuela probably adopted the WHO/IADPSG criteria with regional modifications to diagnose gestational diabetes mellitus.

“They probably adopted the WHO/IADPSG criteria with regional modifications to diagnose GDM [78,96].”

• cites [78] Bhavadharini, 2016, Screening and diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus—Relevance to low and middle income countries, Clin. Diabetes Endocrinol. sourcePartly supported

  The Background section, “Criteria for GDM diagnosis in South and Central America and Europe” (page unavailable), says some Latin American countries adopted IADPSG criteria and many incorporated local modifications. It does not identify Paraguay, Suriname, Bolivia, or Venezuela as countries that did so; the countries it names are different. (LLM, conf=0.82)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
• cites [96] Pereda, 2020, Excessive Maternal Weight and Diabetes Are Risk Factors for Macrosomia: A Cross-Sectional Study of 42,663 Pregnancies in Uruguay, Front. Endocrinol. sourceCould not verify

  The Discussion says the WHO adopted the IADPSG criteria and that diagnostic practices vary across countries. The Materials and Methods describe their use in a Uruguayan study, but neither passage addresses whether Paraguay, Suriname, Bolivia, or Venezuela adopted the criteria with regional modifications. Searches for those countries and for regional diagnostic modifications found no supporting passage. (LLM, conf=0.77)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

According to a meta-analysis by Paulo et al., the overall weighted prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus from 24 European countries was 10.9%.

“According to a meta-analysis prepared by Paulo et al., the overall weighted prevalence of GDM from 24 European countries was 10.9%.”

• cites [99] Paulo, 2021, Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in Europe: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prevalence Studies, Front. Endocrinol. sourceSupported

In Uruguay, the gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence was estimated at 22% using only fasting glucose level ≥5.3 mmol/L.

“The GDM prevalence was estimated at 22% using only fasting glucose level ≥ 5.3 mmol/L (≥92 mg/dL).”

• cites [96] Pereda, 2020, Excessive Maternal Weight and Diabetes Are Risk Factors for Macrosomia: A Cross-Sectional Study of 42,663 Pregnancies in Uruguay, Front. Endocrinol. sourcePartly supported

  The Results (Table 1) report gestational diabetes in 22% of the Uruguayan cohort, and Materials and Methods say it was classified using fasting glucose alone because 2-hour OGTT data were unavailable. But the paper specifies a threshold of ≥92 mg/dL, approximately 5.1 mmol/L—not ≥5.3 mmol/L. The citing sentence therefore gives an incorrect mmol/L threshold. (LLM, conf=0.90)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

In Spain, a population-based study using DDG criteria between 2009 and 2015 assessed gestational diabetes mellitus at 5.27%.

“López-de-Andrés et al. in a population-based study performed between 2009 and 2015 using the DDG criteria assessed GDM at 5.27% [106].”

• cites [106] López-de-Andrés, A., Perez-Farinos, N., Hernández-Barrera, V., Palomar-Gallego, M.A., Carabantes-Alarcón, D., Zamorano-León, J.J., de Miguel-Diez, J., and Jimenez-Garcia, R. (2020). A Population-Based Study of Diabetes During Pregnancy in Spain (2009-2015): Trends in Incidence, Obstetric Interventions, and Pregnancy Outcomes. J. Clin. Med., 9. sourcePartly supported

  The Results report 130,980 gestational-diabetes deliveries among 2,481,479 deliveries in Spain during 2009–2015, approximately 5.28%, close to the claimed 5.27%. But Materials and Methods (§2.1; page unavailable) says the study classified cases using ICD-9-CM discharge codes and describes Spanish screening recommendations; it does not say the study used DDG criteria. (LLM, conf=0.88)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

In Peru, a large prospective study using IADPSG/WHO criteria found a 16% gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence among pregnant women.

“The results presented a 16% GDM prevalence among pregnant women.”

• cites [94] Larrabure-Torrealva, G.T., Martinez, S., Luque-Fernandez, M.A., Sanchez, S.E., Mascaro, P.A., Ingar, H., Castillo, W., Zumaeta, R., Grande, M., and Motta, V. (2018). Prevalence and risk factors of gestational diabetes mellitus: Findings from a universal screening feasibility program in Lima, Peru. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 18. sourcePartly supported

  The Abstract Results report that approximately 16% of pregnant women were diagnosed with GDM, and the Abstract Methods identify a sample of 1,300 women in Lima assessed using IADPSG criteria. The Methods describe the study as cross-sectional, not prospective, and do not identify the diagnostic criteria as WHO criteria. No page numbers are available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

In Austria, Kotzaeridi et al. reported GDM incidence of 17.8%.

“Similar results were presented by Kotzaeridi et al., with an incidence of GDM at 17.8% [136].”

• cites [136] Kotzaeridi, 2021, Characteristics of gestational diabetes subtypes classified by oral glucose tolerance test values, Eur. J. Clin. Investig. sourceSupported

In Belgium, Costa et al. reported an increase in GDM incidence between two- and one-step screening from 3.4% to 16.28%.

“According to study performed by Costa et al., the authors also presented the increase of GDM incidence between two- and one-step screening from 3.4% to 16.28% [143].”

• cites [143] Costa, E., Kirckpartick, C., Gerday, C., De Kempeneer, A., Derisbourg, S., Vercoutere, A., Haumont, S., Pintiaux, A., and Daelemans, C. (2019). Change in prevalence of gestational diabetes and obstetric complications when applying IADPSG screening criteria in a Belgian French speaking University Hospital. A retrospective cohort study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 19. sourceSupported

In Greece, GDM prevalence as assessed by Varela et al. was 14.5%.

“The GDM prevalence, as assessed by Varela et al., was 14.5% [127].”

• cites [127] Varela, 2017, Association between gestational diabetes and perinatal depressive symptoms: Evidence from a Greek cohort study, Prim. Health Care Res. Dev. sourceSupported

In a study from Linz, Austria, GDM prevalence was 16.8% using new criteria.

“In a study performed by researchers from Linz, GDM prevalence was assessed at 16.8% using the new criteria for GDM diagnosis [134].”

• cites [134] Weiss, 2019, The participation rate of migrant women in gestational diabetes screening in Austria: A retrospective analysis of 3293 births, Arch. Gynecol. Obstet. sourceSupported

In Italy, the gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence increased from 9.0% in 2019 to 13.5% in 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic.

“The results showed a statistically significant increase in the GDM prevalence rate from 9.0% in 2019 to 13.5% in 2020 [119].”

• cites [119] Zanardo, 2022, COVID-19 pandemic: Impact on gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence, Diabetes Res. Clin. Pract. sourceSupported

In the Netherlands, Konnig et al. found a 45% increase in diagnosed GDM cases when comparing AIDPSG/WHO 2013 (32%) with WHO 1999 (22%) in high-risk women.

“There was a 45% increase in the number of diagnosed cases (32% in the AIDPSG/WHO 2013 group, and 22% in the WHO 1999 group) [146].”

• cites [146] Koning, 2018, New diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus and their impact on the number of diagnoses and pregnancy outcomes, Diabetologia sourceSupported

In Ireland, Bogdanet et al. found GDM prevalence of 11.4%.

“Similar outcomes were assessed by Bogdanet et al., in their study GDM prevalence was 11.4% [161].”

• cites [161] Bogdanet, 2022, The utility of first trimester plasma glycated CD59 (pGCD59) in predicting gestational diabetes mellitus: A prospective study of non-diabetic pregnant women in Ireland, Diabetes Res. Clin. Pract. sourceSupported

In Born in Bradford cohort study (2007-2010), GDM prevalence was 6.77% using modified WHO 1999 criteria.

“A similar result—at 6.77% was estimated by Martine-Edith et al. in Born in Bradford (BiB) cohort study using modified WHO 1999 criteria, according to local recommendations at the time of the study (2007–2010): fasting glucose level ≥ 6.1 mmol/L (≥110 mg/dL) and 2 h post-load glucose level ≥ 7.8 mmol/L (≥140 mg/dL) [156].”

• cites [156] Johnson, 2021, Associations between maternal characteristics and pharmaceutical treatment of gestational diabetes: An analysis of the UK Born in Bradford (BiB) cohort study, BMJ Open sourcePartly supported

  Methods (Screening and diagnosis of GDM; page unavailable) confirms that the BiB study used modified 1999 WHO criteria with the stated glucose thresholds, and the Participants section gives recruitment as 2007–2010. Results reports 844 women diagnosed with GDM, but our copy does not report a 6.77% prevalence or provide a denominator that verifies it. The paper specifies that either glucose threshold could meet the diagnostic criterion. (LLM, conf=0.86)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

In Norway, three ways to diagnose GDM (WHO 1999, AIDPSG/WHO 2013, and Norwegian guidelines) were used for the last 20 years.

“For the last 20 years, three ways to diagnose GDM (i.e., the WHO 1999; the AIDPSG/WHO 2013 and the Norwegian guidelines) were used.”

• cites [176] Rai, A.S., Sletner, L., Jenum, A.K., Øverby, N.C., Stafne, S.N., Lekva, T., Pripp, A.H., and Sagedal, L.R. (2021). Identifying women with gestational diabetes based on maternal characteristics: An analysis of four Norwegian prospective studies. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 21. sourcePartly supported

  The Background says the 1999 WHO criteria were used in Norway until 2017, and the Methods say the study applied the 1999 WHO, 2013 WHO, and 2017 Norwegian criteria. But the Methods specify that diagnoses during data collection used the 1999 WHO criteria; the other two were applied for this study. The paper therefore does not support saying that all three were used to diagnose GDM in Norway over the last 20 years. (LLM, conf=0.87)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

In Iceland, Tryggvadottir et al. presented GDM incidence of 14.9%.

“A similar result in the GDM incidence was presented by Tryggvadottir et al., at 14.9% [170].”

• cites [170] Tryggvadottir, 2021, Early pregnancy plasma fatty acid profiles of women later diagnosed with gestational diabetes, BMJ Open Diabetes Res. Care sourceSupported

There is a lack of systematically synthesized and integrated data on GDM incidence in Norway.

“There is a lack of systematically synthesized and integrated data on the GDM incidence in Norway [175].”

• cites [175] Behboudi-Gandevani, S., Parajuli, R., and Vaismoradi, M. (2021). A Systematic Review of the Prevalence of Gestational Diabetes in Norway. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 18. sourcePartly supported

  The Abstract states that integrated, systematically synthesized knowledge about GDM prevalence in Norway was lacking. The citing sentence substitutes incidence for prevalence; the paper’s stated gap does not establish a lack of synthesized incidence data. (LLM, conf=0.87)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

In Romania, Preda et al. found hypertension, gestational hypertension, history of fetal macrosomia, GDM in previous pregnancies, maternal age, and weight gain during pregnancy were significantly correlated with GDM.

“According to this study, hypertension, gestational hypertension, history of fetal macrosomia, GDM in previous pregnancies, maternal age, and weight gain during pregnancy were significantly correlated with GDM [166].”

• cites [166] Preda, 2022, Analysis of Risk Factors for the Development of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in a Group of Romanian Patients, J. Diabetes Res. sourceSupported

In a single-center cohort study from Utrecht, de Wit et al. confirmed an increase in GDM prevalence using IADPSG/WHO 2013 criteria compared to WHO 1999, at 32.4% vs. 19.3%.

“In a single center cohort study from Utrecht de Wit et al. confirmed an increase in GDM prevalence using the IADPSG/WHO 2013 criteria compared to the WHO 1999 strategy, at 32.4% vs. 19.3% [149].”

• cites [149] Zijlmans, 2021, Estimated impact of introduction of new diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus, World J. Diabetes sourceSupported

In Norway, Rai et al. assessed GDM prevalence at 10.3% (WHO 1999), 10.7% (Norwegian), and 16.9% (IADPSG/WHO 2013).

“Using this three ways, Rai et al. assessed GDM prevalence at 10.3% (WHO 1999); 10.7% (Norwegian); and 16.9% (IADPSG/WHO2013) [176].”

• cites [176] Rai, A.S., Sletner, L., Jenum, A.K., Øverby, N.C., Stafne, S.N., Lekva, T., Pripp, A.H., and Sagedal, L.R. (2021). Identifying women with gestational diabetes based on maternal characteristics: An analysis of four Norwegian prospective studies. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 21. sourcePartly supported

  The Discussion reports 16.9% under the 2013 WHO criteria, as claimed. It assigns 10.7% to the 1999 WHO criteria and 10.3% to the 2017 Norwegian criteria; the citing sentence reverses those two figures. (LLM, conf=0.94)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

In Sweden, a population-based cohort study 1998-2012 assessed GDM prevalence at 1%.

“A population- based cohort study from Sweden, performed between 1998 and 2012, assessed GDM prevalence for 1%.”

• cites [179] Hanson, 2019, Gestational diabetes and adiposity are independent risk factors for perinatal outcomes: A population based cohort study in Sweden, Diabet. Med. sourceSupported

In Malta, Cuschieri et al. performed universal screening and GDM was diagnosed in 136 cases (33.9%) using OGTT according to IADPSG criteria.

“Cuschieri et al. decided to perform universal screening in their study, and GDM was diagnosed in 136 cases (33.9%) using the OGTT according to the IADPSG criteria [201].”

• cites [201] Cuschieri, 2016, The Role of Untimed Blood Glucose in Screening for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in a High Prevalent Diabetic Population, Scientifica sourcePartly supported

  Materials and Methods reports that 136 of 401 women (33.9%) had GDM confirmed by OGTT under IADPSG criteria. It says all women attending a first antenatal visit were invited, but only about 10% of the obstetric population underwent OGTT; the Discussion describes the participants as a convenience sample with possible selection bias. Calling the study universal screening therefore overstates what was performed. (LLM, conf=0.90)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

In Bosnia and Herzegovina, latest data 2010-2011 from 285 pregnant women with singleton pregnancies who underwent 75 g OGTT between 22 and 32 weeks showed GDM incidence of 10.9% according to WHO 1999 criteria.

“The latest data on the prevalence of GDM from Bosnia and Herzegovina are dated for the years 2010–2011. A total of 285 pregnant women with singleton pregnancies participated in the study. They underwent a 75 g OGTT between 22 and 32 weeks of gestation. The incidence of GDM was assessed at 10.9% according to the WHO 1999 criteria.”

• cites [194] Tomic, 2016, Prevalence of gestational diabetes in the southern part of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Mater. Sociomed. sourcePartly supported

  The Methods and Results report a 2010–2011 study of 285 women with singleton pregnancies who underwent a 75 g OGTT at 22–32 weeks; 31 (10.9%) had GDM under WHO criteria. The paper calls 10.9% a prevalence estimate, not an incidence estimate. It also describes the study as taking place in southern Bosnia and Herzegovina, rather than across the country. (LLM, conf=0.86)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

In Macedonia/Northern Macedonia, the only article presenting GDM prevalence assessed incidence at 66.1%.

“The only article, that presented the GDM prevalence in Macedonia/Northern Macedonia assessed the incidence at 66.1% [193].”

• cites [193] Brankica, 2016, Maternal 75-g OGTT glucose levels as predictive factors for large-for-gestational age newborns in women with gestational diabetes mellitus, Arch. Endocrinol. Metab. sourcePartly supported

  The Results report that 78 of 118 women (66.1%) screened in Skopje had GDM. But the Subjects and Methods describe a single-hospital sample, and the Discussion says it was enriched for women with GDM risk factors; the figure is not established as national prevalence or incidence. The paper also does not establish that it was the only article reporting GDM prevalence in Macedonia/Northern Macedonia. (LLM, conf=0.89)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

In Serbia, Milovanovic et al. presented a lower GDM incidence of 19.5%.

“A lower GDM incidence (19.5%) was presented by Milovanovic et al. in their study assessing usefulness of thyroid screening in GDM prediction [191].”

• cites [191] Milovanović, Z., Filimonović, D., Soldatović, I., and Karadžov Orlić, N. (2022). Can Thyroid Screening in the First Trimester Improve the Prediction of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus?. J. Clin. Med., 11. sourceSupported

In Estonia, another study from November 2013 to March 2015 estimated GDM prevalence at 28.1%.

“Another study showed results from between November 2013 and March 2015, the GDM prevalence was estimated at 28.1% [197].”

• cites [197] Tagoma, 2022, Plasma cytokines during pregnancy provide insight into the risk of diabetes in the gestational diabetes risk group, J. Diabetes Investig. sourcePartly supported

  The Study population section (page unavailable) reports that 60 of 213 women recruited in Estonia between November 2013 and March 2015 had GDM—approximately 28.2%, close to the cited 28.1%. But every participant belonged to a GDM risk group, so this is not an estimate of GDM prevalence among pregnant women in Estonia generally. (LLM, conf=0.88)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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].”

• cites [218] Dias, 2018, Comparing Different Diagnostic Guidelines for Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in Relation to Birthweight in Sri Lankan Women, Front. Endocrinol. sourcePartly supported

  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

In Bangladesh, between 2017 and 2018, overall GDM prevalence was 35% (95/272).

“The overall prevalence of GDM in Bangladesh was 35% (95/272) [216].”

• cites [216] Mazumder, T., Akter, E., Rahman, S.M., and Islam, M.T. (2022). Prevalence and Risk Factors of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in Bangladesh: Findings from Demographic Health Survey 2017-2018. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 23. sourceSupported

Recently there has still been a lack of consensus regarding the use of diagnostic criteria for GDM in Southeast Asia.

“Recently there has still been a lack of consensus regarding the use of diagnostic criteria for GDM in Southeast Asia.”

• cites [228] Kunasegaran, T., Balasubramaniam, V.R.M.T., Arasoo, V.J.T., Palanisamy, U.D., and Ramadas, A. (2021). Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in Southeast Asia: A Scoping Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 18. sourceSupported

In China, incidence rates of GDM diagnosed with NDDG1979 and WHO 1985 guidelines were significantly less than the 7th edition textbook criteria.

“The incidence rates of GDM diagnosed with the NDDG1979 and WHO 1985 guidelines were significantly less than the 7th edition textbook criteria [227].”

• cites [227] He, 2019, Influence of different diagnostic criteria on gestational diabetes mellitus incidence and medical expenditures in China, J. Diabetes Investig. sourceSupported

In Pakistan, between January and August 2017, Wali et al. conducted a study and 21.8% of pregnant women were diagnosed with GDM.

“Between January and August 2017 Wali et al. conducted a study with the main goal of assessing the prevalence of GDM and 21.8% of pregnant women were diagnosed with GDM [219].”

• cites [219] Wali, 2020, High proportion of overt diabetes mellitus in pregnancy and missed opportunity for early detection of diabetes at a tertiary care centre in Pakistan, Pak. J. Med. Sci. sourcePartly supported

  The Abstract Methods describe a review of women registered from January 1 to August 31, 2017, supporting the timeframe. The Results report that 21.8% had diabetes in pregnancy, but only 17.8% of screened women had GDM; the claim incorrectly labels the 21.8% figure as GDM. (LLM, conf=0.91)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

In Saudi Arabia, the highest GDM prevalence is approximately 49.5%.

“It is estimated that the highest GDM prevalence is approximately 49.5%.”

• cites [2] McIntyre, 2016, Issues with the Diagnosis and Classification of Hyperglycemia in Early Pregnancy, Diabetes Care sourceCould not verify

  The paper’s discussion of GDM diagnosis in early pregnancy (pp. 53–54) does not report a prevalence estimate for Saudi Arabia. Searches for “Saudi Arabia” and “49.5%” found no passage supporting the claimed figure. (LLM, conf=0.78)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

In a study of 613 Omani women using current diagnostic criteria, GDM incidence was 48.5%.

“A total of 613 Omani women took part in a study conducted by Subshi et al., which was based on the current diagnostic criteria, and the incidence of GDM was 48.5%.”

• cites [232] Subhi, 2021, Prevalence of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Using the Latest World Health Organization Diagnostic Criteria among Omani Women in Muscat, Oman, Oman. Med. J. sourceSupported

In Saudi Arabia, GDM incidence was higher in the 31-35 age group.

“The incidence of GDM was higher in the 31–35 age group.”

• cites [2] McIntyre, 2016, Issues with the Diagnosis and Classification of Hyperglycemia in Early Pregnancy, Diabetes Care sourceCould not verify

  The paper’s main section (pp. 53–54) discusses diagnostic thresholds for GDM in early pregnancy, including evidence from Italy and China. A search for Saudi Arabia and the 31–35 age group found no passage reporting GDM incidence by age in Saudi Arabia. (LLM, conf=0.78)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

In Bahrain between 2002 and 2010, GDM detection increased from 7.2% to 12.5%.

“Between 2002 and 2010, there was an increase in GDM detection from 7.2% to 12.5%.”

• cites [239] Nagalla, 2005, A population-based screening for gestational diabetes mellitus in non-diabetic women in Bahrain, Ann. Saudi Med. sourceCould not verify

  The Subjects and Methods section describes screening in Bahrain from January 2001 through December 2002, and the Results report a GDM prevalence of 13.3%. Our copy does not report a 2002–2010 trend or detection rates of 7.2% and 12.5% (searched for those figures and the date range). (LLM, conf=0.78)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

In Bahrain, main risk factors for GDM are weight and maternal age.

“The main risk factors are weight and maternal age [239].”

• cites [239] Nagalla, 2005, A population-based screening for gestational diabetes mellitus in non-diabetic women in Bahrain, Ann. Saudi Med. sourcePartly supported

  The Discussion lists pre-pregnancy weight and age among several risk factors for GDM, so it supports identifying both as risk factors. It does not identify them as the main risk factors in Bahrain; instead, it emphasizes the Bahraini population’s high-risk ethnic status. (LLM, conf=0.86)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

No data exist concerning GDM prevalence in Lebanon.

“No data exist concerning GDM prevalence [243].”

• cites [243] Agarwal, 2010, Gestational diabetes mellitus: Simplifying the international association of diabetes and pregnancy diagnostic algorithm using fasting plasma glucose, Diabetes Care sourceCould not verify

  The background passage reports GDM prevalence in the United Arab Emirates, and the Results report prevalence in the study sample; neither addresses Lebanon. Searches for Lebanon and Lebanese GDM prevalence found no passage stating whether prevalence data exist for Lebanon. (LLM, conf=0.74)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

In UAE, different criteria for diagnosing GDM exist.

“In the UEA different kind of criteria for diagnosis GDM exist.”

• cites [242] Agarwal, M.M. (2020). Gestational Diabetes in the Arab Gulf Countries: Sitting on a Land-Mine. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 17. sourceSupported

No data exist concerning GDM prevalence in Syria.

“No data exist concerning GDM prevalence [243].”

• cites [243] Agarwal, 2010, Gestational diabetes mellitus: Simplifying the international association of diabetes and pregnancy diagnostic algorithm using fasting plasma glucose, Diabetes Care sourceCould not verify

  The Abstract’s background passage reports GDM prevalence in the United Arab Emirates, and the Results report prevalence under two diagnostic criteria. Searches for Syria, Syrian, and the claimed absence of prevalence data found no passage addressing whether GDM prevalence data exist for Syria. The absence of a Syria discussion in this paper does not establish that no such data exist. (LLM, conf=0.75)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

In a 2019 cross-sectional study in Kuwait, among 868 mothers with no prior history of diabetes, 109 were diagnosed with GDM, resulting in 12.6%.

“Of the 868 mothers with no prior history of diabetes mellitus, 109 reported were given a GDM diagnosis, resulting in 12.6% [234].”

• cites [234] Groof, 2019, Prevalence, Risk Factors, and Fetomaternal Outcomes of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in Kuwait: A Cross-Sectional Study, J. Diabetes Res. sourceSupported

Due to the political situation, no recent data on GDM prevalence exist in Yemen.

“Due to the political situation no recent data concerning GDM prevalence exist [242].”

• cites [242] Agarwal, M.M. (2020). Gestational Diabetes in the Arab Gulf Countries: Sitting on a Land-Mine. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 17. sourceSupported

GDM prevalence in UAE varies from 7.9% to 37.7%.

“The prevalence of GDM in the UAE varies from 7.9 to 37.7%.”

• cites [242] Agarwal, M.M. (2020). Gestational Diabetes in the Arab Gulf Countries: Sitting on a Land-Mine. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 17. sourceSupported

Studies on gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence and screening methods in Paraguay, Suriname, Bolivia, and Venezuela were not found.

“Studies on the GDM prevalence and screening methods in Paraguay, Suriname, Bolivia, and Venezuela were not found.”

Studies concerning GDM prevalence and screening in Slovakia, Ukraine, Belarus, Latvia, San Marino, Liechtenstein, Monaco, Luxembourg, Moldova, Andorra, Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan were not found.

“Studies concerning GDM prevalence and screening in Slovakia, Ukraine, Belarus, Latvia, San Marino, Liechtenstein, Monaco, Luxembourg, Moldova, Andorra, Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan were not found.”

It is estimated that GDM in Asian countries ranges from 1.2 to 49.5%.

“It is estimated that GDM in Asian countries ranges from 1.2 to 49.5% (Figure 2).”

• cites [205] Amani, 2017, Gestational diabetes prevalence and risk factors among pregnant women—Jazan Region, Saudi Arabia, Diabetol. Prakt.Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

There is currently not enough research to show which way is best to diagnose gestational diabetes mellitus.

“There is currently not enough research to show which way is the best at diagnosing GDM.”

• cites [1] Eknoyan, 2005, A history of diabetes mellitus or how a disease of the kidneys evolved into a kidney disease, Adv. Chronic Kidney Dis. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

The incidence of gestational diabetes mellitus in Australia was approximately 14%.

“which resulted in approximately 14% incidence of GDM in Australia [21].”

• cites [21] (2022, July 22). Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Australia’s Mothers and Babies Data Visualisations, Available online: https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/mothers-babies/australias-mothers-babies-visualisations/data.Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Some local drivers such as infections or undernutrition may play a role in the higher risk for gestational diabetes mellitus development in Africa.

“Additionally, some local drivers such as infections or undernutrition may play a role in the higher risk for GDM development [36].”

• cites [36] Nyirenda, 2016, Non-communicable diseases in sub-Saharan Africa: Understanding the drivers of the epidemic to inform intervention strategies, Int. Health sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

The lack of uniformity in gestational diabetes mellitus diagnosis protocols between and within African countries creates problems when comparing gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence on the continent.

“This lack of uniformity in GDM diagnosis protocols between countries and within countries create problems when comparing the prevalence of GDM on this continent.”

The two-step criteria were adopted by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

“These criteria were adopted by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG).”

• cites [47] Committee on Practice Bulletins-Obstetrics (2018). ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 190: Gestational Diabetes Mellitus. Obstet. Gynecol., 131, e49–e64. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In 1988, the first paper reporting the incidence of gestational diabetes mellitus in Mexico estimated it at 4%.

“However, in 1988, the first paper was published reporting the incidence of GDM—the level estimated was at 4% [55].”

• cites [55] Forsbach, 1988, Prevalence of Gestational Diabetes and Macrosomic Newborns in a Mexican Population, Diabetes Care sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Argentina, the gestational diabetes mellitus incidence using IADPSG criteria was 2.54 times higher (24.9%) than the prevalence according to ALAD guidelines (9.8%).

“The results showed that the GDM incidence in Argentina using the IADPSG criteria was 2.54 higher (24.9%) than the prevalence according to the ALAD guidelines (9.8%).”

• cites [83] Sucani, 2021, Prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus in Argentina according to the Latin American Diabetes Association (ALAD) and International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) diagnostic criteria and the associated maternal-neonatal complications, Health Care Women Int. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

The incidence of gestational diabetes mellitus in Mexico achieved more than 30% in 2016.

“The incidence achieved more than 30% in 2016 [62].”

• cites [62] 2017, Enfermedades metabólicas maternas asociadas a sobrepeso y obesidad pregestacional en mujeres mexicanas que cursan con embarazo de alto riesgo, Cirugia. y Cirujanos. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Argentina, no differences were found in BMI, maternal age or pregnancy length between pregnant patients diagnosed using ALAD and IADPSG guidelines.

“No differences were found in BMI, maternal age or pregnancy length between pregnant patients diagnosed using the ALAD and IADPSG guidelines.”

• cites [83] Sucani, 2021, Prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus in Argentina according to the Latin American Diabetes Association (ALAD) and International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) diagnostic criteria and the associated maternal-neonatal complications, Health Care Women Int. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

According to IDF Diabetes Atlas 2021, the standardized pooled prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus in South America and Central America was 10.4%.

“According to the IDF Diabetes Atlas 2021 the standardized pooled prevalence of GDM in South America and Central America (SACA) was 10.4%.”

• cites [42] Wang, 2022, IDF Diabetes Atlas Committee Hyperglycaemia in Pregnancy Special Interest Group. IDF Diabetes Atlas: Estimation of Global and Regional Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Prevalence for 2021 by International Association of Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Group’s Criteria, Diabetes Res. Clin. Pract. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

The increased number of obese, ethnically diverse, and maternal aged patients contributed to the increase in gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence in Canada.

“Additionally, it cannot be forgotten the increased number of obese, ethnically diverse, and maternal aged patients, who had a large contribution to the increase in the GDM prevalence [73].”

• cites [73] Agarwal, 2015, Gestational diabetes mellitus: An update on the current international diagnostic criteria, World J. Diabetes sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In France, one-sixth of gestational diabetes mellitus cases would have been missed by selective screening compared with universal screening using IADPSG criteria.

“The results showed that one-sixth of GDM cases would have been missed by selective screening [115].”

• cites [115] Miailhe, 2015, Selective rather than universal screening for gestational diabetes mellitus?, Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Portugal, the highest gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence was among women with GDM ≥40 years.

“The highest prevalence was estimated among women with GDM ≥ 40 years [110,111].”

• cites [110] (2022, July 20). (In Portuguese).Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites [111] (2022, July 20). (In Portuguese).Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

In Katalonia, an increasing trend in gestational diabetes mellitus frequency from 3.81% in 2009 to 6.53% in 2015 was observed.

“Additionally, an increasing trend in the GDM frequency from 3.81% in 2009 to 6.53% in 2015 was observed [107].”

• cites [107] Gortazar, 2019, Trends in prevalence of gestational diabetes and perinatal outcomes in Catalonia, Spain, 2006 to 2015: The Diagestcat Study, Diabetes Metab. Res. Rev. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In a study in Zapatoka, Colombia, using Santander mixed criteria, the gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence was 4.46%.

“In a study performed between 2013 and 2017 in Zapatoka, the Santander mixed criteria were used to diagnose GDM, and the prevalence was estimated at 4.46% [91].”

• cites [91] 2018, Prevalencia de diabetes gestacional en el Hospital Gestionar Bienestar, Zapatoca, Santander 2013–2017, Med. UISNot checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Another study estimated the gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence in Chile at 6.6%.

“Another study estimated the GDM prevalence in Chile at 6.6% among pregnant women [88].”

• cites [88] Huidobro, 2017, Association of ABO blood groups with gestational diabetes mellitus, Rev. Med. ChileNot checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

According to the International Diabetes Federation, the regional standardized gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence in Europe was 7.8%.

“Seventeen studies were analyzed by the IDF to assess the regional standardized GDM prevalence in Europe—7.8% [42].”

• cites [42] Wang, 2022, IDF Diabetes Atlas Committee Hyperglycaemia in Pregnancy Special Interest Group. IDF Diabetes Atlas: Estimation of Global and Regional Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Prevalence for 2021 by International Association of Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Group’s Criteria, Diabetes Res. Clin. Pract. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Katalonia, the mean gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence between 2009 and 2015 was estimated at 4.8%.

“These results are similar to data presented by Gortazar from Katalonia—the mean GDM prevalence between 2009 and 2015 was estimated at 4.8% [107].”

• cites [107] Gortazar, 2019, Trends in prevalence of gestational diabetes and perinatal outcomes in Catalonia, Spain, 2006 to 2015: The Diagestcat Study, Diabetes Metab. Res. Rev. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

The Portuguese Gynecological Society uses the IADPSG criteria for screening and diagnosing gestational diabetes mellitus.

“The Portuguese Gynecological Society uses the IADPSG criteria for screening and diagnosing GDM [109].”

• cites [109] Chaves, 2021, Metformin combined with insulin in women with gestational diabetes mellitus: A propensity score-matched study, Acta Diabetol. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Argentina, there was an almost two-fold increase in gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence compared to 1995 (5.0%) and 2009 (5.8%).

“Additionally, the authors presented an almost two-fold increase in the GDM prevalence [83] in comparison to the years: 1995 (5.0%) [84] and 2009 (5.8%) [85].”

• cites [83] Sucani, 2021, Prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus in Argentina according to the Latin American Diabetes Association (ALAD) and International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) diagnostic criteria and the associated maternal-neonatal complications, Health Care Women Int. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites [84] Salzberg, 1995, Recomendationes para gestantes con diabetes, Rev. SADNot checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites [85] McCarthy, 2010, Universal versus selective screening for the detection, control and prognosis of gestational diabetes mellitus in Argentina, Acta Diabetol. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Chile, risk factors for gestational diabetes mellitus included age, civil status, education, family history of type 2 diabetes mellitus, personal history of GDM, preeclampsia, hypertension, pre-gestational nutritional status, smoking, and alcohol.

“Additionally, researchers presented the risk factors for GDM: age, civil status, education, family history of T2DM, personal history of GDM, preeclampsia, hypertension, pre-gestational nutritional status, smoking, and alcohol [87].”

• cites [87] Garmendia, 2020, Trends and predictors of gestational diabetes mellitus in Chile, Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

The gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence in Ecuador is estimated at approximately 10%.

“The GDM prevalence in Ecuador is estimated at approximately 10% [89].”

• cites [89] Andrade, 2019, Diabetes gestacional: Incidencias, complicaciones y manejo a nivel mundial y en Ecuador, RECIMUNDO sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In a study in Popayán, Colombia, using IADPSG/WHO 2013 criteria, the estimated prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus was 16.32%.

“In another study from Colombia, using the IADPSG/WHO 2013 criteria, which took place between July 2017 and March 2018 at the Hospital Universitario San José in Popayán, the estimated prevalence of GDM was 16.32%.”

• cites [92] 2021, Prevalence of gestational diabetes and identification of associated factors and maternal-perinatal outcomes in Colombia following the implementation of the IADPSG criteria, Rev. Fac. Med.Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

In Spain, the gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence changed from 10.6% using old 1979 criteria to 35.5% using IADPSG/WHO 2013 criteria.

“In a study comparing the criteria from 1979 and the IADPSG/WHO 2013 guidelines, the results were surprising: the GDM prevalence changed dramatically from 10.6% using old criteria to 35.5% using the new criteria [105].”

• cites [105] Duran, 2014, Introduction of IADPSG criteria for the screening and diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus results in improved pregnancy outcomes at a lower cost in a large cohort of pregnant women: The St. Carlos Gestational Diabetes Study, Diabetes Care sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In 2012, two-step screening for GDM with a 50 g GCT and a 75 g OGTT was inaugurated in Germany.

“In 2012 two-steps screening of GDM with a 50 g—GCT and a 75 g—OGTT was inaugurated in Germany [120].”

• cites [120] Melchior, 2017, The Prevalence of Gestational Diabetes, Dtsch. Arztebl. Int. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In the North Rhine region of Germany, GDM incidence was 6.02% in the 12 months before universal screening and 6.81% in the 12 months after.

“Researchers from the North Rhine region analyzed data from 12 months before and 12 months after the introduction of universal screening with an incidence of 6.02% before, and 6.81% after.”

• cites [125] Tamayo, 2016, Prevalence of gestational diabetes and risk of complications before and after initiation of a general systematic two-step screening strategy in Germany (2012-2014), Diabetes Res. Clin. Pract. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Greece, GDM diagnosis is related to seasons, with highest prevalence in summer and lowest in winter.

“Vasileiou et al. showed that a GDM diagnosis is related to seasons, the highest prevalence was assessed in the summer, and the lowest in the winter [129].”

• cites [129] Vasileiou, 2018, The impact of environmental temperature on the diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus, Eur. J. Endocrinol. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Switzerland, Huhn et al. found GDM prevalence increased from 3.3% before changing criteria to 11.8% after.

“The results showed an enormous increase in the GDM prevalence rate from, 3.3% in period 1 to 11.8% in period 2 [132].”

• cites [132] Huhn, 2017, Fourfold increase in prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus after adoption of the new International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria, J. Perinat. Med. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In the North Rhine region of Germany, the GDM prevalence rate relatively increased by approximately 13.12% after universal screening began.

“They found that the prevalence rate relatively increased by approximately 13.12% after the beginning of universal screening.”

• cites [125] Tamayo, 2016, Prevalence of gestational diabetes and risk of complications before and after initiation of a general systematic two-step screening strategy in Germany (2012-2014), Diabetes Res. Clin. Pract. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Italy, only 55% performed OGTTs according to national guidelines.

“Additionally, they consented that with the lack of proper screening—only 55% performed OGTTs according national guidelines.”

• cites [117] Gualdani, 2017, Screening for gestational diabetes in Tuscany, Italy. A population study, Diabetes Res. Clin. Pract. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In the North Rhine region of Germany, GDM prevalence was highest among women between 36 and 40 years.

“Additionally, the GDM prevalence was the highest among women between 36 and 40 years [125].”

• cites [125] Tamayo, 2016, Prevalence of gestational diabetes and risk of complications before and after initiation of a general systematic two-step screening strategy in Germany (2012-2014), Diabetes Res. Clin. Pract. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Switzerland, Orecchio et al. studied 1042 pregnant women in 2004-2005 and found GDM prevalence of 4.8%.

“Orecchio et al. in 2004–2005 performed a study among 1042 pregnant women, and the prevalence was 4.8%.”

• cites [131] Orecchio, 2014, Incidence of gestational diabetes and birth complications in Switzerland: Screening in 1042 pregnancies, Gynecol. Endocrinol. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Germany, overall GDM prevalence in 2014-2015 was 13.2%.

“The overall prevalence was estimated at 13.2%, with the highest rate among women ≥ 45 years at 26% [120].”

• cites [120] Melchior, 2017, The Prevalence of Gestational Diabetes, Dtsch. Arztebl. Int. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Germany, the highest GDM prevalence rate in 2014-2015 was among women ≥45 years, at 26%.

“The overall prevalence was estimated at 13.2%, with the highest rate among women ≥ 45 years at 26% [120].”

• cites [120] Melchior, 2017, The Prevalence of Gestational Diabetes, Dtsch. Arztebl. Int. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Tuscany, the gestational diabetes mellitus prevalence rate was 11%.

“Di Canni et al. confirmed the GDM prevalence rate—at 11% when analyzing data from Tuscany.”

• cites [117] Gualdani, 2017, Screening for gestational diabetes in Tuscany, Italy. A population study, Diabetes Res. Clin. Pract. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Greece, Papachatzopoulou et al. estimated GDM prevalence at 11.5% in a prospective cohort study.

“A similar result was estimated by Papachatzopoulou et al. in their prospective cohort study, at 11.5% [128].”

• cites [128] Papachatzopoulou, 2020, Abnormal fasting, post-load or combined glucose values on oral glucose tolerance test and pregnancy outcomes in women with gestational diabetes mellitus, Diabetes Res Clin. Pract. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In a study from Brest, obesity was related to gestational diabetes mellitus (OR 5.83, 95% CI: 4.37-7.79).

“A study from Brest confirmed that obesity is related to GDM (OR 5.83, 95%CI: 4.37–7.79) [116].”

• cites [116] Lautredou, 2022, Excessive gestational weight gain is an independent risk factor for gestational diabetes mellitus in singleton pregnancies: Results from a French cohort study, Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Switzerland, Aubry et al. found a threefold increase in GDM prevalence from 2.7% in 2005-2010 to 8.3% in 2012-2017.

“The threefold increase in GDM prevalence was observed between these two periods from 2.7% in the first period to 8.3% in the second period [133].”

• cites [133] Aubry, 2021, Effect of the IADPSG screening strategy for gestational diabetes on perinatal outcomes in Switzerland. Diabetes, Res. Clin. Pract. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Before introduction of new guidelines in Austria, approximately 7-10% pregnant women were affected by GDM according to the literature.

“Before the introduction of the new guidelines approximately 7–10% pregnant women were affected by GDM according to the literature [135].”

• cites [135] Handisurya, 2009, Gestationsdiabetes, J. Klin. Endokrinol. Stoffw.Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Before universal screening in Germany, a trend of increasing GDM prevalence rates was observed.

“Before starting universal screening in Germany, a trend of increasing GDM prevalence rates was observed [124].”

• cites [124] (2022, July 20). Institut für Qualitätssicherung und Transparenz im Gesundheits—Wesen (IQTIG): Beschreibung der Qualitätsindikatoren für das Erfassungsjahr 2015—Geburtshilfe. (In German).Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

In Iceland, GDM prevalence is estimated between 15.5 and 19% using IADPSG criteria.

“The GDM prevalence in Iceland is estimated between 15.5 and 19% using the IADPSG criteria [168,169].”

• cites [168] (2022, July 15). Available online: https://throunarmidstod.is/library/Files/GDM%20mataræði%20leiðbeiningar.pdf.Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites [169] Juliusdottir, 2019, Prescribing physical activity after labour, for women diagnosed with gestational diabetes mellitus, LaeknabladidNot checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

In Hungary, using AIDPSG criteria, Kun et al. estimated GDM prevalence at 16.6% retrospectively.

“Using this criteria Kun et al. estimated the GDM prevalence in Hungary at 16.6% retrospectively [164].”

• cites [164] Kun, 2011, The prevalence and predictors of gestational diabetes mellitus in Hungary, Horm. Metab. Res. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In the Netherlands, GDM prevalence is estimated at approximately 5% using WHO 1999 criteria.

“The GDM prevalence in the Netherlands is estimated at approximately 5% using the WHO 1999 criteria [145].”

• cites [145] Kwee, 2016, External validation of prognostic models to predict risk of gestational diabetes mellitus in one Dutch cohort: Prospective multicentre cohort study, BMJNot checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

In Denmark, a national study 2004-2012 among 566,083 patients showed GDM incidence increased from 1.7% in 2004 to 2.9% in 2012.

“The results showed an increase in GDM incidence from 1.7% in 2004 to 2.9% in 2012.”

• cites [172] Jeppesen, 2017, National study of the prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus among Danish women from 2004 to 2012, Scand. J. Public Health sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Norway, other researchers confirmed that GDM was more frequently diagnosed in immigrants from South Asia than in women of Norwegian origin.

“Other researchers confirmed that GDM was more frequently diagnosed in immigrants from South Asia than in women of Norwegian origin [177].”

• cites [177] Strandberg, 2021, Gestational diabetes mellitus by maternal country of birth and length of residence in immigrant women in Norway, Diabet. Med. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Sandwell, West Midlands, UK, GDM prevalence was 6.8% using NICE 2015 guidelines.

“GDM prevalence was diagnosed in 6.8% cases using the NICE 2015 guidelines [155].”

• cites [155] Plant, 2020, Unmet needs of women with GDM: A health needs assessment in Sandwell, West Midlands, J. Public Health sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Scotland, after changing criteria, GDM prevalence increased from 1.28% in 2010 to 2.54% in 2012.

“After changing the criteria, the GDM prevalence increased from 1.28% in 2010 to 2.54% in 2012 [157].”

• cites [157] Stirrat, 2015, Screening and management of gestational diabetes mellitus in Scottish obstetric units: A national survey, Scott. Med. J. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Hungary, data collected between 2009 and 2017 showed an increase in GDM incidence from 12.4% in 2009 to 18.5% in 2017.

“Data collected between 2009 and 2017 and presented also by Kun et al. showed an increase in the GDM incidence from 12.4% in 2009 to 18.5% in 2017 [165].”

• cites [165] Kun, A., Szabó, E., Tornoczky, J., Kerenyi, Z., and Tabák, Á.G. (2022, July 10). Increasing Prevalence of Gestational Diabetes According to the Results of a Population-Based Screening Programme in Hungary Between 2009–2017. Available online: https://www.easd.org/virtualmeeting/home.html%20#!resources/increasing-prevalence-of-gestational-diabetes-according-to-the-results-of-a-population-based-screening-programme-in-hungary-between-2009-2017.Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

In Denmark, another study conducted in 2004-2017 estimated GDM prevalence at 2.5%.

“Another study from Denmark conducted in years 2004–2017 estimated GDM prevalence on 2.5% [173].”

• cites [173] Thacher, 2021, Transportation noise and gestational diabetes mellitus: A nationwide cohort study from Denmark, Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Malta, Xuereb et al. using IADPSG and WHO 2006 criteria estimated GDM prevalence in 21.2% cases with universal screening.

“Xuereb et al. using the IADPSG and WHO 2006 criteria estimated GDM prevalence in 21.2% cases with universal screening [202].”

• cites [202] Xuereb, 2019, Gestational Glycemic Parameters and Future Cardiometabolic Risk at Medium-Term Follow Up, Can. J. Diabetes sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Serbia, Perovic estimated GDM prevalence in high-risk patients at 25.7%.

“Perovic estimated the GDM prevalence in high-risk patients for 25.7% [189].”

• cites [189] Perovic, 2015, Relationship between mid-trimester ultrasound fetal liver length measurements and gestational diabetes mellitus, J. Diabetes sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Slovenia, Lucovnik et al. analyzed 276,210 deliveries and observed an increase in GDM prevalence from 2.6% to 9.7%.

“Lucovnik et al. analyzed the data before and after changing the GDM diagnostic criteria from 276 210 deliveries. An increase in the GDM prevalence from 2.6% to 9.7% of cases was observed [186].”

• cites [186] Lucovnik, 2020, Changes in perinatal outcomes after implementation of IADPSG criteria for screening and diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus: A national survey, Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Lithuania, according to WHO 1999 criteria, GDM was diagnosed in 6.9% of obese patients vs. 2.9% in controls (p = 0.195, OR 2.43 (95% CI 0.61-9.68)).

“According to the WHO 1999 criteria, GDM was diagnosed in 6.9% of obese patients vs. 2.9% in the controls (p = 0.195, OR 2.43 (95% CI (0.61–9.68)).”

• cites [199] (2022, July 20). Available online: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12512/96184.Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

In Finland, GDM prevalence in primiparous women was 16.5%.

“The prevalence of GDM in primiparous women in Finland was assessed at 16.5% [182].”

• cites [182] Laine, 2018, Gestational diabetes in primiparous women-impact of age and adiposity: A register-based cohort study, Acta. Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Croatia used WHO 1999 criteria before changing to IADPSG guidelines.

“Croatia used the WHO 1999 criteria before changing to the IADPSG guidelines.”

• cites [187] Kralik, 2013, Redefinition of gestational diabetes mellitus: Implications for laboratory practice in Croatia, Biochem. Med.Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

In south Sweden, Nilsson et al. estimated GDM incidence at 2.2% for 2012-2013 using a 75 g OGTT with a 2 h cut-off of 10 mmol/L.

“In another study, Nilsson et al. estimated the incidence of GDM in south Sweden at 2.2% for the years 2012–2013. They used a 75 g OGTT with a 2 h cut-off value of 10 mmol/L (180 mg/dL) to diagnose GDM [180].”

• cites [180] Nilsson, 2015, Outcomes of women with gestational diabetes mellitus in Sweden, Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Lithuania, using IADPSG criteria, GDM was diagnosed in 41.2% of obese pregnant women vs. 9.8% in controls (p = 0.0001, OR 6.44 (95% CI 3.00-13.81)).

“Using the IADPSG criteria, GDM was diagnosed in 41.2% cases of obese pregnant women vs. 9.8% in the control group (p = 0.0001, OR 6.44 (95% CI (3.00–13.81)) [199].”

• cites [199] (2022, July 20). Available online: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12512/96184.Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

In Bulgaria, according to Bojadzhieva et al., GDM prevalence in 2010 was 11.3% using ADA criteria.

“According to Bojadzhieva et al., the GDM prevalence in 2010 was estimated at 11.3% using the ADA criteria for GDM diagnosis [203].”

• cites [203] Bojadzhieva, 2010, Screening for gestational diabetes in Bulgaria--preliminary results, Akush. Ginekol.Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

In Estonia, Kirss et al. conducted research in 2012 and found GDM incidence of 6.0%.

“Kirss et al. conducted their research in 2012, and the GDM incidence was 6.0% [196].”

• cites [196] Kirss, 2015, Gestational diabetes: Risk factors and prevalence at the Women’s Clinic of Tartu University Hospital 2012–2013, Est. PhysicianNot checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

In Finland, Ellenberg et al. found an increase in GDM incidence from 7.2% to 11.2% between 2006-2008 and 2010-2012.

“Ellenberg et al., analyzing data from the Hospital Discharge Register and the Finnish Medical Birth Register in the years 2006–2008 and 2010–2012 found an increase in GDM incidence from 7.2% to 11.2% [185].”

• cites [185] Ellenberg, 2017, New guidelines for screening, diagnosing, and treating gestational diabetes—Evaluation of maternal and neonatal outcomes in Finland from 2006 to 2012, Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Sri Lanka, a cross-sectional study between January 2014 and March 2015 using fasting 75 g OGTT according to WHO 1999 found positive results in 13.9% of participants.

“Positive results were noted in 13.9% of the participants [217].”

• cites [217] Sudasinghe, 2016, Prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus in a Suburban District in Sri Lanka: A population-based study, Ceylon Med. J. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Japan, women screened for GDM using random plasma glucose and a 50 g GCT had a significantly higher incidence of GDM (6.6% vs. 8.9%, p < 0.0001).

“Moreover, women who were screened for GDM using random plasma glucose and a 50 g GCT had a significantly higher incidence of GDM (6.6% vs. 8.9%, p < 0.0001) [226].”

• cites [226] Morikawa, M., Sugiyama, T., Hiramatsu, Y., and Sagawa, N. (2022). Screening methods for gestational diabetes mellitus in Japan in 2018: A retrospective cohort study using a national surveillance questionnaire. Endocr. J., EJ22-0072. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In 2010, Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology changed diagnostic guidelines for GDM to IADPSG criteria.

“In 2010 the Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology (JSOG) changed the diagnostic guidelines for detecting GDM to the IADPSG criteria [224].”

• cites [224] Shindo, 2021, Effect of interventions in pregnant women with mildly impaired glucose tolerance, J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Res. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Japan, in 2018, the percentage of women screened using 5.3 mmol/L as cut-off for random plasma glucose was significantly higher than those tested using 5.55 mmol/L (2.7% and 6.9%, p < 0.0001).

“The percentage of women screened using 5.3 mmol/L (95 mg/dL) as the cut-off value for random plasma glucose was significantly higher in comparison to those who were tested using 5.55 mmol/L (100 mg/dL) as the cut-off value for random plasma glucose (2.7% and 6.9%, p < 0.0001).”

• cites [226] Morikawa, M., Sugiyama, T., Hiramatsu, Y., and Sagawa, N. (2022). Screening methods for gestational diabetes mellitus in Japan in 2018: A retrospective cohort study using a national surveillance questionnaire. Endocr. J., EJ22-0072. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Jordan between 2015 and 2016, GDM prevalence was assessed at 13.5%.

“In Jordan between 2015 and 2016, the GDM prevalence was assessed on 13.5%.”

• cites [241] Basha, 2018, Prevalence of gestational diabetes and contributing factors among pregnant Jordanian women attending Jordan University hospital, Int. J. Diabetes Dev. Ctries. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Iran during 2015-2016, GDM risk was 10.1%.

“In Iran during 2015–2016, 1010 pregnant women took part in a screening program. The risk of GDM was 10.1%.”

• cites [236] Najafi, 2020, Estimation of gestational diabetes mellitus and dose-response association of BMI with the occurrence of diabetes mellitus in pregnant women of the west of Iran, Health Care Women Int. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Due to the political situation, no recent data on GDM prevalence exist in Iran.

“Due to the political situation no recent data concerning GDM prevalence exist [236].”

• cites [236] Najafi, 2020, Estimation of gestational diabetes mellitus and dose-response association of BMI with the occurrence of diabetes mellitus in pregnant women of the west of Iran, Health Care Women Int. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Jordan, maternal age, parity, gravidity, maternal BMI and pre-pregnancy BMI were risk factors for GDM.

“Maternal age, parity, gravidity, maternal BMI and pre-pregnancy BMI were risk factors [241].”

• cites [241] Basha, 2018, Prevalence of gestational diabetes and contributing factors among pregnant Jordanian women attending Jordan University hospital, Int. J. Diabetes Dev. Ctries. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

GDM prevalence in Iraq in 2014 was estimated at 7%.

“The GDM prevalence in 2014 in Iraq was estimated on 7% [237].”

• cites [237] Aziz, 2018, Maternal and fetal outcome in gestational diabetic women, Zanco J. Med. Sci. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In a 2020 study of 120 pregnant women in Iraq, approximately 13.3% GDM was detected.

“In 2020 120 pregnant women took part in a study, in which approximately 13.3% GDM was detected [238].”

• cites [238] Mohammed, 2020, Estimating the difference of glucose levels during 1st and 3rd trimester of pregnancy in Tikrit city in Iraq, Ann. Trop. Med. Public Health sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

GDM prevalence in the Qatari population in 2017 was 24.25%.

“The prevalence of GDM in the Qatari population in 2017 was 24.25%.”

• cites [235] Bayoumi, M., Masri, R.M., Matani, N., Hendaus, M.A., and Masri, M.M. (2021). Maternal and neonatal outcomes in mothers with diabetes mellitus in qatari population. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 24. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Qatar, higher maternal age and obesity were significantly associated with increased risk of GDM.

“A higher maternal age and obesity were significantly associated with an increased risk of GDM [235].”

• cites [235] Bayoumi, M., Masri, R.M., Matani, N., Hendaus, M.A., and Masri, M.M. (2021). Maternal and neonatal outcomes in mothers with diabetes mellitus in qatari population. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 24. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

In Qatar, HbA1C% before delivery was significantly higher in women with GDM compared to healthy ones.

“The HbA1C% before delivery was significantly higher in women with GDM in comparison to healthy ones.”

• cites [235] Bayoumi, M., Masri, R.M., Matani, N., Hendaus, M.A., and Masri, M.M. (2021). Maternal and neonatal outcomes in mothers with diabetes mellitus in qatari population. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth, 24. sourceNot checked — no full text of the source