Table 1.
Summary of selected screening strategies recommending the use of risk factors for the identification of gestational diabetes.
Fig 1.
Flow chart of the systematic review search process.
Table 2.
Characteristics of studies included in the systematic review.
Fig 2.
Screening performance (sensitivity and percentage offered an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT)) by study and by risk factor method (guideline recommendations, number (No) of risk factors, ‘other method and risk model/score).
The colour of the points indicates the study. The shape of the points (circles, triangle, square, cross) indicates method used No. RF = number of risk factors (i.e. presence of one risk factor, two risk factors and so on). Studies may report more than one performance estimate, this is reflected in the number of coloured shapes for each study.
Fig 3.
Screening performance of guidelines using a risk factor screening strategy.
Vertical and horizontal lines show the 95% confidence intervals for sensitivity and positive rate respectively. The colour of the points indicates the study. The shape of the points (circles, triangle, square, cross) indicates method used. RF = Risk factor, No = number. ACOG = American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ADA = American Diabetes Association. ADIPS = Australasian Diabetes In Pregnancy Society. NICE = National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Studies may report more than one performance estimate, this is reflected in the number of coloured shapes for each study.
Fig 4.
Screening performance of risk prediction or scoring models.
The colour of the points indicates the study. Vertical and horizontal lines show the 95% confidence intervals for sensitivity and positive rate respectively. Studies may report more than one performance estimate, this is reflected in the number of coloured shapes for each study
Fig 5.
Screening performance of risk factor combinations for identifying GDM using IPD.
The colour of the points indicates the number (No) of risk factors included. Circles indicate results for Atlantic DIP and triangles represent results for BiB.
Table 3.
Performance of risk factors, grouped by age, BMI and UK NICE categories for the identification of GDM using IPD
Table 4.
The associations between risk factors and GDM using IPD
Fig 6.
Sensitivity and positive rate when using a risk prediction model to predict GDM using IPD