↓ Skip to main content

Characteristics of different risk factors and fasting plasma glucose for identifying GDM when using IADPSG criteria: a cross-sectional study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Characteristics of different risk factors and fasting plasma glucose for identifying GDM when using IADPSG criteria: a cross-sectional study
Published in
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12884-018-1875-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maryam Saeedi, Ulf Hanson, David Simmons, Helena Fadl

Abstract

The Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare (SNBHW) recommended the new diagnostic criteria for GDM based upon Hyperglycaemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes (HAPO) study thresholds. Due to limited knowledge base, no recommendations were made on GDM screening. The aim of this study is to evaluate test characteristics of risk factors and fasting blood glucose as screening tests for diagnosing GDM using diagnostic thresholds based upon HAPO study 1.75/2.0 (model I/II respectively) odds ratio for adverse pregnancy outcomes. This cross-sectional, population-based study included all pregnant women who attended maternal health care in Örebro County, Sweden between the years 1994-96. A 75 g OGTT with capillary fasting and 2-h blood glucose was offered to all pregnant women at week 28-32. Risk factors and repeated random glucose samples were collected. Sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of blood glucose were calculated. Prevalence of GDM was 11.7% with model I and 7.2% with the model II criteria. Risk factors showed 28%, (95% CI 24-32) and 31%, (95% CI 25-37) sensitivity for model I and II respectively. A fasting cut off ≥4.8 mmol/l occurred in 24% of women with 91%, (95% CI 88-94) sensitivity and 85%, (95% CI 83-86) specificity using model I while a fasting cut off ≥5.0 mmol/l occurred in 14% with 91%, (95% CI 87-94) sensitivity and 92%, (95% CI 91-93) specificity using model II. Risk factor screening for GDM was found to be poorly predictive of GDM but fasting glucose of 4.8-5.0 mmol/l showed good test characteristics irrespective of diagnostic model and results in a low rate of OGTTs.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 48 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 15%
Researcher 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Lecturer 3 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 18 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 40%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 6%
Unspecified 1 2%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 18 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 June 2018.
All research outputs
#5,829,019
of 23,090,520 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#1,513
of 4,251 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,392
of 328,585 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#63
of 154 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,090,520 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,251 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,585 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 154 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.