Models Predicting Postpartum Glucose Intolerance Among Women with a History of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: a Systematic Review.

IF 5.2 2区 医学 Q1 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Yitayeh Belsti, Lisa Moran, Demelash Woldeyohannes Handiso, Vincent Versace, Rebecca Goldstein, Aya Mousa, Helena Teede, Joanne Enticott
{"title":"Models Predicting Postpartum Glucose Intolerance Among Women with a History of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: a Systematic Review.","authors":"Yitayeh Belsti,&nbsp;Lisa Moran,&nbsp;Demelash Woldeyohannes Handiso,&nbsp;Vincent Versace,&nbsp;Rebecca Goldstein,&nbsp;Aya Mousa,&nbsp;Helena Teede,&nbsp;Joanne Enticott","doi":"10.1007/s11892-023-01516-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Despite the crucial role that prediction models play in guiding early risk stratification and timely intervention to prevent type 2 diabetes after gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), their use is not widespread in clinical practice. The purpose of this review is to examine the methodological characteristics and quality of existing prognostic models predicting postpartum glucose intolerance following GDM.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>A systematic review was conducted on relevant risk prediction models, resulting in 15 eligible publications from research groups in various countries. Our review found that traditional statistical models were more common than machine learning models, and only two were assessed to have a low risk of bias. Seven were internally validated, but none were externally validated. Model discrimination and calibration were done in 13 and four studies, respectively. Various predictors were identified, including body mass index, fasting glucose concentration during pregnancy, maternal age, family history of diabetes, biochemical variables, oral glucose tolerance test, use of insulin in pregnancy, postnatal fasting glucose level, genetic risk factors, hemoglobin A1c, and weight. The existing prognostic models for glucose intolerance following GDM have various methodological shortcomings, with only a few models being assessed to have low risk of bias and validated internally. Future research should prioritize the development of robust, high-quality risk prediction models that follow appropriate guidelines, in order to advance this area and improve early risk stratification and intervention for glucose intolerance and type 2 diabetes among women who have had GDM.</p>","PeriodicalId":10898,"journal":{"name":"Current Diabetes Reports","volume":"23 9","pages":"231-243"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10435618/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Diabetes Reports","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11892-023-01516-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose of review: Despite the crucial role that prediction models play in guiding early risk stratification and timely intervention to prevent type 2 diabetes after gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), their use is not widespread in clinical practice. The purpose of this review is to examine the methodological characteristics and quality of existing prognostic models predicting postpartum glucose intolerance following GDM.

Recent findings: A systematic review was conducted on relevant risk prediction models, resulting in 15 eligible publications from research groups in various countries. Our review found that traditional statistical models were more common than machine learning models, and only two were assessed to have a low risk of bias. Seven were internally validated, but none were externally validated. Model discrimination and calibration were done in 13 and four studies, respectively. Various predictors were identified, including body mass index, fasting glucose concentration during pregnancy, maternal age, family history of diabetes, biochemical variables, oral glucose tolerance test, use of insulin in pregnancy, postnatal fasting glucose level, genetic risk factors, hemoglobin A1c, and weight. The existing prognostic models for glucose intolerance following GDM have various methodological shortcomings, with only a few models being assessed to have low risk of bias and validated internally. Future research should prioritize the development of robust, high-quality risk prediction models that follow appropriate guidelines, in order to advance this area and improve early risk stratification and intervention for glucose intolerance and type 2 diabetes among women who have had GDM.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

预测有妊娠糖尿病史的妇女产后葡萄糖耐受不良的模型:一项系统综述。
综述目的:尽管预测模型在指导妊娠期糖尿病(GDM)后2型糖尿病的早期风险分层和及时干预方面具有重要作用,但在临床实践中应用并不广泛。本综述的目的是研究预测GDM后产后葡萄糖耐受不良的现有预后模型的方法学特征和质量。最近的发现:对相关的风险预测模型进行了系统的评价,得出了来自不同国家研究小组的15篇符合条件的出版物。我们的审查发现,传统的统计模型比机器学习模型更常见,只有两种模型被评估为具有低偏差风险。7个内部验证,但没有一个外部验证。分别有13项和4项研究进行了模型判别和校正。确定了各种预测因素,包括体重指数、妊娠期间空腹血糖浓度、母亲年龄、糖尿病家族史、生化变量、口服葡萄糖耐量试验、妊娠期间胰岛素使用、产后空腹血糖水平、遗传危险因素、血红蛋白A1c和体重。现有的GDM后葡萄糖耐受不良的预后模型在方法学上存在各种缺陷,只有少数模型被评估为具有低偏倚风险并在内部得到验证。未来的研究应优先发展稳健、高质量的风险预测模型,并遵循适当的指导方针,以推进这一领域的发展,并改善患有GDM的女性中葡萄糖耐受不良和2型糖尿病的早期风险分层和干预。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
52
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The goal of this journal is to publish cutting-edge reviews on subjects pertinent to all aspects of diabetes epidemiology, pathophysiology, and management. We aim to provide incisive, insightful, and balanced contributions from leading experts in each relevant domain that will be of immediate interest to a wide readership of clinicians, basic scientists, and translational investigators. We accomplish this aim by appointing major authorities to serve as Section Editors in key subject areas across the discipline. Section Editors select topics to be reviewed by leading experts who emphasize recent developments and highlight important papers published over the past year on their topics, in a crisp and readable format. We also provide commentaries from well-known figures in the field, and an Editorial Board of internationally diverse members suggests topics of special interest to their country/region and ensures that topics are current and include emerging research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信