Cited by 22Gestational Diabetes Research and ManagementDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsMaternal and Neonatal Healthcare

Prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus in a Suburban District in Sri Lanka: A population-based study

Open access
Sudasinghe, B H, Ginige, P S, Wijeyaratne, C N·2016·Ceylon Medical Journal

Abstract

Introduction: GDM is a leading metabolic cause of morbidity to mother and offspring. Determining its prevalence is important for health planning and implementation. Objective: Assess prevalence of GDM in the District of Gampaha. Method: Community based cross-sectional study was conducted in women attending field-based ante-natal clinics in two Medical Officer of Health (MOH) areas between January 2014 to March 2015. Consecutive women were recruited by cluster sampling with probability proportionate to size using strict exclusion criteria. GDM diagnosis was based on fasting 75 g OGTT, WHO 1999. All responders underwent 2 hr PPBS in first trimester- >200 mg/dl with symptoms identified as abnormal, probably diabetes in pregnancy (DIP); those >120 and <200 mg/dl proceeded to OGTT before 16 weeks POA; all negatives were tested by OGTT between 24-28 weeks. Negatives for GDM at 24-28 weeks underwent OGTT between 32-36 weeks; venous plasma glucose tested by accredited laboratory. Results: Sample consistedof 160, non-response 4.2% (67); 1533 underwent 2 hr PPBS with 40 exceeding 120mg: 4 >200 mg diagnosed as GDM / DIP, 36 (PPBS >120 < 200 mg) underwent OGTT before 16 weeks with 15 GDM. One hundred and thirty four (8.38%) miscarried including one with early abnormal OGTT. Of 1381 eligible for OGTT (24- 28 weeks) 150 had GDM (10.86%). Only 344 (27.94% of normal 1231) consented for third trimester OGTT, of whom 25 had GDM- yielding a total of 194 with GDM (13.9%). Conclusions: The current community prevalence of GDM in the suburban Gampaha District, Sri Lanka is high.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4038/cmj.v61i4.8379

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • 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

Flagged first, then by citations

7 of the 21 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sudasinghe, B. H., Ginige, P. S., & Wijeyaratne, C. N.
Affiliations
University of Colombo (LK)
Venue
Ceylon Medical Journal
Published
2016-12-30
Volume
61
Issue
4
Pages
149
ISSN
  • 0009-0875 (ISSN-L)
  • 2386-1274
OpenAlex
W2565609602
Cited by
22
References
21
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1
FWCI
2.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Ceylon Medical Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Gestational Diabetes Research and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Maternal and Neonatal Healthcare
Keywords
gestational diabetes mellitus, prevalence, Sri Lanka, Gampaha District, oral glucose tolerance test, first-trimester screening, third-trimester screening, miscarriage, diabetes in pregnancy, prenatal care

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