Current diabetes reports · 2023
Models Predicting Postpartum Glucose Intolerance Among Women with a History of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: a Systematic Review.
Систематический обзорСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Belsti Yitayeh, Moran Lisa, Handiso Demelash Woldeyohannes, Versace Vincent, Goldstein Rebecca, Mousa Aya, Teede Helena, Enticott Joanne
Аннотация
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.
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.