Search

Background: A variety of screening tools and criteria are used for the diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). As a result, the prevalence rate of GDM varied from 4.41% to 57.90% among studies from Pakistan. Beside this disagreement, similar multi-centric studies, community surveys and pooled evidence were lacking from the country. Therefore, this first systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to measure the overall and subgroup pooled estimates of GDM and explore the methodological variations among studies for any inconsistency. Methods: Using the PRISMA guidelines, seventy studies were identified from PubMed, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar and PakMediNet database. Of them, twenty-four relevant studies were considered for systematic review and nine eligible studies selected for meta-analysis. AXIS was used for measuring quality of reporting, I^2 statistics for heterogeneity among studies and subgroups, funnel plot for reporting potential publication bias and forest plot for presenting pooled estimates. Results: The pooled sample of nine studies was 27,034 (126 – 12,450) pregnant women, of any gestational age, from all four provinces of Pakistan. Overall pooled estimate of GDM was 16.7% (95% CI 13.1 – 21.1). The highest subgroup pooled estimate of GDM observed in studies from Balochistan (35.8%), followed by Islamabad (23.9%), Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (17.2%), Sindh (13.2%), and Punjab (11.4%). The studies that adopted 75g 2-h OGTT had a little lower pooled estimate (16.3% vs. 17.3%); and that adopted diagnostic cut-off values [≥ 92 (F), ≥ 180 (1-h) and ≥ 153 (2-h)] had a greater pooled estimate (25.4% vs. 15.8%). The studies that adopted Carpenter criteria demonstrated the highest subgroup pooled estimate of GDM (26.3%), after that IADPSG criteria (25.4%), and ADA criteria (23.9%). Conclusions: Along with poor quality of reporting, publishing in non-indexed journals and significant disagreement between studies, the prevalence rate of GDM is high in Pakistan. Consensus building among stakeholders for recommended screening methods; and continuous medical education of the physicians are much needed for a timely detection and treatment of GDM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]