Examining the quality of life among pregnant women diagnosed with gestational diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta-analysis for women's health promotion.

IF 2.4 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Health Promotion Perspectives Pub Date : 2024-07-29 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.34172/hpp.2024.05
Majid Mobasseri, Mehrnoush Mobasseri, Ayda Alizadeh, Sara Hakimzadeh, Seyedeh Sara Ebadi, Samin Imani, Nima Pourgholam, Saber Azami-Aghdash
{"title":"Examining the quality of life among pregnant women diagnosed with gestational diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta-analysis for women's health promotion.","authors":"Majid Mobasseri, Mehrnoush Mobasseri, Ayda Alizadeh, Sara Hakimzadeh, Seyedeh Sara Ebadi, Samin Imani, Nima Pourgholam, Saber Azami-Aghdash","doi":"10.34172/hpp.2024.05","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Quality of life (QoL) of women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is one of the fundamental issues and public health challenges. This study examines the QoL among pregnant women with GDM through a systematic review and meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A search was conducted in Scopus, PubMed, and the Web of Science databases for articles published until Jan 30, 2024. Manual searches of gray literature, Google Scholar, reference checks, and citation checks were conducted. The JBI's Critical Appraisal Checklist for Analytical Cross-Sectional Studies was utilized to assess the quality of the articles' reporting. The random model implemented in Stata software (version 16; Stata Corp.) was utilized to conduct the meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the 516 studies obtained from the literature, only 15 were deemed suitable for inclusion. Most studies (73.3%) were conducted in nations with high-income levels. Additionally, general QoL was assessed in most studies (11 studies). The SF-36 and WHOQOLBREF questionnaires were the most often utilized. Based on the SF-36 measure, there was no statistically significant difference in the QoL of patients with GDM compared to the control group in most of dimensions. The WHOQOL-BREF instrument was utilized to estimate the QoL score at 49.69. The EQ-5D-5L tool revealed a difference in QoL scores between the GDM and control groups (MD=-7.40). The research findings were highly heterogeneous. The median evaluation score for the reporting quality of the articles was calculated to be 5, with a mean of 4.8 out of 7.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The results of the present study showed that GDM reduces the QoL of pregnant women, especially in terms of mental and social health. Therefore, interventions and support programs should be designed and implemented to improve these women's QoL.</p>","PeriodicalId":46588,"journal":{"name":"Health Promotion Perspectives","volume":"14 2","pages":"109-120"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11403342/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Promotion Perspectives","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34172/hpp.2024.05","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Quality of life (QoL) of women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is one of the fundamental issues and public health challenges. This study examines the QoL among pregnant women with GDM through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods: A search was conducted in Scopus, PubMed, and the Web of Science databases for articles published until Jan 30, 2024. Manual searches of gray literature, Google Scholar, reference checks, and citation checks were conducted. The JBI's Critical Appraisal Checklist for Analytical Cross-Sectional Studies was utilized to assess the quality of the articles' reporting. The random model implemented in Stata software (version 16; Stata Corp.) was utilized to conduct the meta-analysis.

Results: Among the 516 studies obtained from the literature, only 15 were deemed suitable for inclusion. Most studies (73.3%) were conducted in nations with high-income levels. Additionally, general QoL was assessed in most studies (11 studies). The SF-36 and WHOQOLBREF questionnaires were the most often utilized. Based on the SF-36 measure, there was no statistically significant difference in the QoL of patients with GDM compared to the control group in most of dimensions. The WHOQOL-BREF instrument was utilized to estimate the QoL score at 49.69. The EQ-5D-5L tool revealed a difference in QoL scores between the GDM and control groups (MD=-7.40). The research findings were highly heterogeneous. The median evaluation score for the reporting quality of the articles was calculated to be 5, with a mean of 4.8 out of 7.

Conclusion: The results of the present study showed that GDM reduces the QoL of pregnant women, especially in terms of mental and social health. Therefore, interventions and support programs should be designed and implemented to improve these women's QoL.

研究被诊断患有妊娠糖尿病的孕妇的生活质量:促进妇女健康的系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:妊娠期糖尿病(GDM)妇女的生活质量(QoL)是基本问题和公共卫生挑战之一。本研究通过系统综述和荟萃分析对妊娠糖尿病孕妇的生活质量进行了研究:方法:在 Scopus、PubMed 和 Web of Science 数据库中检索 2024 年 1 月 30 日之前发表的文章。还对灰色文献、谷歌学术、参考文献和引文进行了人工检索。采用 JBI 的分析性横断面研究批判性评估检查表来评估文章的报告质量。使用Stata软件(版本16;Stata Corp.)中的随机模型进行荟萃分析:在从文献中获得的 516 项研究中,只有 15 项被认为适合纳入。大多数研究(73.3%)是在高收入国家进行的。此外,大多数研究(11 项)对一般 QoL 进行了评估。最常用的是 SF-36 和 WHOQOLBREF 问卷。根据 SF-36 测量,与对照组相比,GDM 患者的 QoL 在大多数维度上都没有统计学意义上的显著差异。采用 WHOQOL-BREF 工具估算的 QoL 得分为 49.69。EQ-5D-5L工具显示,GDM组和对照组的QoL得分存在差异(MD=-7.40)。研究结果差异很大。据计算,文章报告质量的评估得分中位数为 5 分,平均值为 4.8 分(满分 7 分):本研究结果表明,GDM 降低了孕妇的生活质量,尤其是在心理和社会健康方面。因此,应设计并实施干预措施和支持计划,以改善这些妇女的生活质量。
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
Health Promotion Perspectives
Health Promotion Perspectives PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
7.10
自引率
2.30%
发文量
27
审稿时长
13 weeks
×
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