Abstract

BackgroundA variety of screening tools and criteria are used for the diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). As a result, the prevalence rate of GDM varied from 4.41% to 57.90% among studies from Pakistan. Beside this disagreement, similar multi-centric studies, community surveys and pooled evidence were lacking from the country. Therefore, this first systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to measure the overall and subgroup pooled estimates of GDM and explore the methodological variations among studies for any inconsistency.MethodsUsing the PRISMA guidelines, seventy studies were identified from PubMed, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar and PakMediNet database. Of them, twenty-four relevant studies were considered for systematic review and nine eligible studies selected for meta-analysis. AXIS was used for measuring quality of reporting, I^2 statistics for heterogeneity among studies and subgroups, funnel plot for reporting potential publication bias and forest plot for presenting pooled estimates.ResultsThe pooled sample of nine studies was 27,034 (126 – 12,450) pregnant women, of any gestational age, from all four provinces of Pakistan. Overall pooled estimate of GDM was 16.7% (95% CI 13.1 – 21.1). The highest subgroup pooled estimate of GDM observed in studies from Balochistan (35.8%), followed by Islamabad (23.9%), Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (17.2%), Sindh (13.2%), and Punjab (11.4%). The studies that adopted 75g 2-h OGTT had a little lower pooled estimate (16.3% vs. 17.3%); and that adopted diagnostic cut-off values [≥ 92 (F), ≥ 180 (1-h) and ≥ 153 (2-h)] had a greater pooled estimate (25.4% vs. 15.8%). The studies that adopted Carpenter criteria demonstrated the highest subgroup pooled estimate of GDM (26.3%), after that IADPSG criteria (25.4%), and ADA criteria (23.9%).ConclusionsAlong with poor quality of reporting, publishing in non-indexed journals and significant disagreement between studies, the prevalence rate of GDM is high in Pakistan. Consensus building among stakeholders for recommended screening methods; and continuous medical education of the physicians are much needed for a timely detection and treatment of GDM.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call