4.7 Review

Recurrence of gestational diabetes mellitus - A systematic review

期刊

DIABETES CARE
卷 30, 期 5, 页码 1314-1319

出版社

AMER DIABETES ASSOC
DOI: 10.2337/dc06-2517

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIDDK NIH HHS [K23DK071552] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVE - The purpose of this study was to examine rates and factors associated with recurrence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) among women with a history of GDM. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS - We conducted a systematic literature review of articles published between January 1965 and November 2006, in which recurrence rates of GDM among women with a history of GDM were reported. Factors abstracted included recurrence rates, time elapsed between pregnancies, race/ethnicity, diagnostic criteria, and, when available, maternal age, parity, weight or BMI at the initial and subsequent pregnancy, weight. gain at the initial or subsequent pregnancy and between pregnancies, insulin use, gestational age at diagnosis, glucose tolerance test levels, baby birth weight and presence of macrosomia, and breast-feeding. RESULTS - Of 45 articles identified, 13 studies were eligible for inclusion. After the index pregnancy, recurrence rates varied between 30 and 84%. Lower rates were found in non-Hispanic white (NHW) populations (30-37%), and higher rates were found in minority populations (52-69%). Exceptions to observed racial/ethnic variations in recurrence were found in cohorts that were composed of a significant proportion of both NHW and minority women or that included women who had subsequent pregnancies within 1 year. No other risk factors. were consistently associated with recurrence of GDM across studies. The rates of future preexisting diabetes in pregnancy, socioeconomic status, postpartum diabetes screening rates after the index pregnancy, and the average length of time between pregnancies were generally not reported. CONCLUSIONS - Recurrence of GDM was common and may vary most significantly by NHW versus minority race/ethnicity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据