Dergiler / Journal of Clinical Research in Pediatric Endocrinology / 2016 / Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 3

The Relationship between Maternal Gestational Impaired Glucose Tolerance and Risk of Large-for-Gestational-Age Infant: A MetaAnalysis of 14 Studies

Sayfa
264–269
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Conclusion: Gestational IGT is an independent predictor of neonatal LGA.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Objective: To explore, by conducting a meta-analysis, whether gestational impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) is an independent predictor of neonatal large for gestational age (LGA) or not.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Heterogeneity was tested by using chi-square test and I2 statistics.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Conclusion: Gestational IGT is an independent predictor of neonatal LGA.
🔬Tür:Laboratuvar & Saha Deneyi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Abstract

Objective: To explore, by conducting a meta-analysis, whether gestational impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) is an independent predictor of neonatal large for gestational age (LGA) or not. Methods: Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched to identify published epidemiological studies (cohort and case-control studies) investigating the association between gestational IGT and neonatal LGA. Calculations of pooled estimates were conducted in random-effect models or fixed-effects models. Heterogeneity was tested by using chi-square test and I2 statistics. Egger's test (linear regression method) and Begg's test (rank correlation method) were used to assess potential publication bias. Results: Fourteen observational studies were included in the meta-analysis. The overall risk for the effect of IGT on LGA was 2.09 (1.56, 2.78). Stratified analyses showed no differences regarding different geographic regions or the analysis of overall adjusted odds ratios. No evidence of publication bias was observed in either Egger's test or Begg's test results. Conclusion: Gestational IGT is an independent predictor of neonatal LGA.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

WANG, H., LAİ, H., LI, Y., LİU, Q., Hu, S., Lİ, L. (2016). The Relationship between Maternal Gestational Impaired Glucose Tolerance and Risk of Large-for-Gestational-Age Infant: A MetaAnalysis of 14 Studies. Journal of Clinical Research in Pediatric Endocrinology, Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 3, 264–269. https://ajindex.com/articles/217249

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (8)

  1. Hanefeld M, Koehler C, Fuecker K, Henkel E, Schaper F, Temelkova-Kurktschiev T; Impaired Glucose Tolerance for Atherosclerosis and Diabetes study. Insulin secretion and insulin sensitivity pattern is different in isolated impaired glucose tolerance and impaired fasting glucose: the risk factor in Impaired Glucose Tolerance for Atherosclerosis and Diabetes study. Diabetes Care 2003;26:868-874.
  2. Crowther CA, Hiller JE, Moss JR, McPhee AJ, Jeffries WS, Robinson JS; Australian Carbohydrate Intolerance Study in Pregnant Women (ACHOIS) Trial Group. Effect of treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus on pregnancy outcomes. N Engl J Med 2005;352:2477-2486. Epub 2005 Jun 12 Tan YY, Yeo GS. Impaired glucose tolerance in pregnancy--is it of consequence? Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 1996;36:248-255.
  3. Miyakoshi K, Tanaka M, Saisho Y, Shimada A, Minegishi K, Kim SH, Asai S, Itoh H, Yoshimura Y. Pancreatic beta-cell function and fetal growth in gestational impaired glucose tolerance. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2010;89:769-775.
  4. Black MH, Sacks DA, Xiang AH, Lawrence JM. Clinical outcomes of pregnancies complicated by mild gestational diabetes mellitus differ by combinations of abnormal oral glucose tolerance test values. Diabetes Care 2010;33:2524- 2530. Epub 2010 Sep 15 Stang A. Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Eur J Epidemiol 2010;25:603-605. Epub 2010 Jul 22 Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 2003;327:557-560.
  5. Der Simonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Controlled Clin Trials 1986;7:177-188.
  6. Nikolakopoulou A, Mavridis D, Salanti G. How to interpret meta-analysis models: fixed effect and random effects meta- analyses. Evid Based Ment Health 2014;17:64. Woolf B. On estimating the relation between blood group and disease. Ann Hum Genet 1955;19:251-253.
  7. Light RJ, Pillemer DB. Summing Up: The Science Of Reviewing Research. Harvard University Press, 1984:191. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 1997;315:629-634.
  8. Begg CB, Mazumdar M. Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics 1994;50:1088- 1101. Disse E, Graeppi-Dulac J, Joncour-Mills G, Dupuis O, Thivolet C. Heterogeneity of pregnancy outcomes and risk of LGA neonates in Caucasian females according to IADPSG criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus