Prediction of gestational diabetes mellitus in the first trimester, comparison of fasting plasma glucose, two-step and one-step methods: A prospective randomized controlled trial
Endocrine, ISSN: 1559-0100, Vol: 46, Issue: 3, Page: 512-518
2014
- 51Citations
- 79Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations51
- Citation Indexes46
- 46
- CrossRef18
- Policy Citations5
- Policy Citation5
- Captures79
- Readers79
- 79
Article Description
Our aim was to evaluate and compare the diagnostic performance of three methods commonly used for GDM screening: fasting plasma glucose (FPG), two-step 50 g glucose challenge test (GCT), and 75 g glucose tolerance test (GTT) in a randomized study design to predict GDM in the first trimester and determine the best approach in predicting GDM. In a non-blind, parallel-group prospective randomized controlled study; 736 singleton pregnant women underwent FPG testing in the first trimester and randomly assigned to two groups; two-step 50 g GCT and 75 g GTT. GDM diagnosis was made according to Carpenter-Coustan or ADA (American Diabetes Association) criteria in two-step 50 g GCT and 75 g GTT groups, respectively. Subsequent testing was performed by two-step 50 g GCT at 24-28 weeks for screen negatives. After excluding the women who were lost to follow-up or withdrawn as a result of pregnancy loss, 486 pregnant women were recruited in the study. The FPG, two-step GCT, and one-step GTT methods identified GDM in 25/486 (5.1 %), 15/248 (6.0 %), and 27/238 (11.3 %) women, respectively. Area under ROC curves were 0.623, 0.708, and 0.792, respectively. Sensitivities were 47.17, 68.18, and 87.1 %, respectively. Specificities were 77.37, 100, and 100 %, respectively. Positive predictive values were 20.33, 100, and 100 %, respectively. Negative predictive values were 92.29, 97, and 98.1 %, respectively. Until superior screening alternatives become available, the 75 g GTT may be preferred for GDM screening in the first trimester. © 2013 Springer Science+Business Media.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84904582206&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12020-013-0111-z; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24282036; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12020-013-0111-z; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12020-013-0111-z; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12020-013-0111-z
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know