Prevalence of gestational diabetes according to commonly used data sources: an observational study.

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Lawrence, Robyn L en
dc.contributor.author Wall, Clare en
dc.contributor.author Bloomfield, Francis en
dc.date.accessioned 2020-01-13T00:01:52Z en
dc.date.issued 2019-10-11 en
dc.identifier.citation BMC pregnancy and childbirth 19(1):349 11 Oct 2019 en
dc.identifier.issn 1471-2393 en
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/2292/49652 en
dc.description.abstract BACKGROUND:It is well recognized that prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) varies depending on the population studied and the diagnostic criteria used. The data source used also can lead to substantial differences in the reporting of GDM prevalence but is considered less frequently. Accurate estimation of GDM prevalence is important for service planning and evaluation, policy development, and research. We aimed to determine the prevalence of GDM in a cohort of New Zealand women using a variety of data sources and to evaluate the agreement between different data sources. METHODS:A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from the Growing Up in New Zealand Study, consisting of a cohort of 6822 pregnant women residing in a geographical area defined by three regional health boards in New Zealand. Prevalence of GDM was estimated using four commonly used data sources. Coded clinical data on diabetes status were collected from regional health boards and the Ministry of Health's National Minimum Dataset, plasma glucose results were collected from laboratories servicing the recruitment catchment area and coded according to the New Zealand Society for the Study of Diabetes diagnostic criteria, and self-reported diabetes status collected via interview administered questionnaires. Agreement between data sources was calculated using the proportion of agreement with 95% confidence intervals for both a positive and negative diagnosis of GDM. RESULTS:Prevalence of GDM combining data from all sources in the Growing Up in New Zealand cohort was 6.2%. Estimates varied from 3.8 to 6.9% depending on the data source. The proportion of agreement between data sources for presence of GDM was 0.70 (95% CI 0.65, 0.75). A third of women who had a diagnosis of GDM according to medical data reported having no diabetes in interview administered questionnaires. CONCLUSION:Prevalence of GDM varies considerably depending on the data source used. Health services need to be aware of this and to understand the limitations of local data sources to ensure service planning and evaluation, policy development and research are appropriate for the local prevalence. Improved communication of the diagnosis may assist women's self-management of GDM. en
dc.format.medium Electronic en
dc.language eng en
dc.relation.ispartofseries BMC pregnancy and childbirth en
dc.rights Items in ResearchSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated. Previously published items are made available in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. en
dc.rights.uri https://researchspace.auckland.ac.nz/docs/uoa-docs/rights.htm en
dc.rights.uri https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ en
dc.subject Humans en
dc.subject Diabetes, Gestational en
dc.subject Blood Glucose en
dc.subject Prevalence en
dc.subject Cohort Studies en
dc.subject Pregnancy en
dc.subject Social Class en
dc.subject Information Storage and Retrieval en
dc.subject Databases, Factual en
dc.subject Adult en
dc.subject Asian Continental Ancestry Group en
dc.subject European Continental Ancestry Group en
dc.subject Oceanic Ancestry Group en
dc.subject Laboratories en
dc.subject New Zealand en
dc.subject Female en
dc.subject Young Adult en
dc.subject Self Report en
dc.subject Surveys and Questionnaires en
dc.title Prevalence of gestational diabetes according to commonly used data sources: an observational study. en
dc.type Journal Article en
dc.identifier.doi 10.1186/s12884-019-2521-2 en
pubs.issue 1 en
pubs.begin-page 349 en
pubs.volume 19 en
dc.rights.holder Copyright: The authors en
pubs.publication-status Published en
dc.rights.accessrights http://purl.org/eprint/accessRights/OpenAccess en
pubs.subtype research-article en
pubs.subtype Journal Article en
pubs.subtype Observational Study en
pubs.elements-id 784195 en
pubs.org-id Liggins Institute en
pubs.org-id LiFePATH en
pubs.org-id Medical and Health Sciences en
pubs.org-id Medical Sciences en
pubs.org-id Nutrition en
dc.identifier.eissn 1471-2393 en
pubs.record-created-at-source-date 2019-10-13 en
pubs.dimensions-id 31604463 en


Files in this item

Find Full text

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Share

Search ResearchSpace


Browse

Statistics