Progressing towards standard outcomes in gestational diabetes Cochrane reviews and randomised trials

Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Volumn 56, Issue 1, 2016, Pages 113-116

  Bain, Emily ^a   Middleton, Philippa ^a   Crowther, Caroline A ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ADELAIDE   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

clinical trial; gestational diabetes; outcome assessment; research design; systematic review

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; HUMAN; MACROSOMIA; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PERINATAL MORTALITY; PREGNANCY DIABETES MELLITUS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); STANDARD; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC); DIABETES, GESTATIONAL; FEMALE; LITERATURE; PREGNANCY; PROCEDURES; STANDARDS;

DIABETES, GESTATIONAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PREGNANCY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC;

EID: 84956911397     PISSN: 00048666     EISSN: 1479828X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/ajo.12433     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Metzger BE, Coustan DR,. Summary and recommendations of the Fourth International Workshop-Conference on Gestational Diabetes Mellitus. Diabetes Care 1998; 21 (Suppl 2): B161-B167.
2. Guariguata L, Linnenkamp U, Beagley J, et al,. Global estimates of the prevalence of hyperglycaemia in pregnancy. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2014; 103: 176-185.
3. Moses RG, Morris GJ, Petocz P, et al,. The impact of potential new diagnostic criteria on the prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus in Australia. Med J Aust 2011; 194 (7): 338-340.
4. Laafira A, White SW, Griffin CJ, Graham D,. Impact of the new IADPSG gestational diabetes diagnostic criteria on pregnancy outcomes in Western Australia. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2015; doi: 10.1111/ajo.12394 [Epub ahead of print].
5. Reece EA,. The fetal and maternal consequences of gestational diabetes mellitus. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2010; 23 (3): 199-203.
6. Alwan N, Tuffnell DJ, West J,. Treatments for gestational diabetes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009; (3): CD003395.
7. Macleod MR, Michie S, Roberts I, et al,. Biomedical research: increasing value, reducing waste. Lancet 2014; 383 (9912): 101-104.
8. Chan AW, Song F, Vickers A, et al,. Increasing value and reducing waste: addressing inaccessible research. Lancet 2014; 383 (9913): 257-266.
9. WOMBAT: WOMen and Babies Health and Wellbeing: Action through Trials. Standard outcomes. [Accessed 3 March 2014]. Available from URL: http://www.wombatcollaboration.net/index.php
10. The COMET Initiative. About COMET. [Accessed 3 March 2014]. Available from URL: http://www.comet-initiative.org/about/overview
11. Higgins JPT, Green D, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0, 2001. The Cochrane Collaboration. [Accessed 15 March 2011]. Available from URL: www.cochrane-handbook.org
12. Bennett WL, Robinson KA, Saldanha IJ, et al,. High priority research needs for gestational diabetes. J Womens Health 2012; 21 (9): 925-932.
13. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. The Crown Initiative. [Accessed 3 March 2014]. Available from URL: http://www.bjog.org/view/0/crown-initiative.html
14. Gargon E, Gurung B, Medley N, et al,. Choosing important health outcomes for comparative effectiveness research: a systematic review. PLoS One 2014; 9 (6): e99111.
15. The COMET Initiative. Developing a core outcome set (COS) for clinical trials in GDM. [Accessed 10 July 2015]. Available from URL: http://www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/686
16. Wuytack F, Smith V, Clarke M,. Towards core outcome set (COS) development: a follow-up descriptive survey of outcomes in Cochrane reviews. Syst Rev 2015; 4: 73.