A core outcome set for studies of gestational diabetes mellitus prevention and treatment

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this systematic review was to develop core outcome sets (COSs) for trials evaluating interventions for the prevention or treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). METHODS: We identified previously reported outcomes through a systematic review of the literature. These outcomes were presented to key stakeholders (including patient representatives, researchers and clinicians) for prioritisation using a three-round, e-Delphi study. A priori consensus criteria informed which outcomes were brought forward for discussion at a face-to-face consensus meeting where the COS was finalised. RESULTS: Our review identified 74 GDM prevention and 116 GDM treatment outcomes, which were presented to stakeholders in round 1 of the e-Delphi study. Round 1 was completed by 173 stakeholders, 70% (121/173) of whom went on to complete round 2; 84% (102/121) of round 2 responders completed round 3. Twenty-two GDM prevention outcomes and 30 GDM treatment outcomes were discussed at the consensus meeting. Owing to significant overlap between included prevention and treatment outcomes, consensus meeting stakeholders agreed to develop a single prevention/treatment COS. Fourteen outcomes were included in the final COS. These consisted of six maternal outcomes (GDM diagnosis, adherence to the intervention, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, requirement and type of pharmacological therapy for hyperglycaemia, gestational weight gain and mode of birth) and eight neonatal outcomes (birthweight, large for gestational age, small for gestational age, gestational age at birth, preterm birth, neonatal hypoglycaemia, neonatal death and stillbirth). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: This COS will enable future GDM prevention and treatment trials to measure similar outcomes that matter to stakeholders and facilitate comparison and combination of these studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered prospectively with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) database: http://www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/686/

A core outcome set for the treatment of pregnant women with pregestational diabetes: an international consensus study

Objective: To develop a core outcome set (COS) for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effectiveness of interventions for the treatment of pregnant women with pregestational diabetes mellitus (PGDM). Design: A consensus developmental study. Setting: International. Population: Two hundred and five stakeholders completed the first round. Methods: The study consisted of three components. (1) A systematic review of the literature to produce a list of outcomes reported in RCTs assessing the effectiveness of interventions for the treatment of pregnant women with PGDM. (2) A three-round, online eDelphi survey to prioritise these outcomes by international stakeholders (including healthcare professionals, researchers and women with PGDM). (3) A consensus meeting where stakeholders from each group decided on the final COS. Main outcome measures: All outcomes were extracted from the literature. Results: We extracted 131 unique outcomes from 67 records meeting the full inclusion criteria. Of the 205 stakeholders who completed the first round, 174/205 (85%) and 165/174 (95%) completed rounds 2 and 3, respectively. Participants at the subsequent consensus meeting chose 19 outcomes for inclusion into the COS: trimester-specific haemoglobin A1c, maternal weight gain during pregnancy, severe maternal hypoglycaemia, diabetic ketoacidosis, miscarriage, pregnancy-induced hypertension, pre-eclampsia, maternal death, birthweight, large for gestational age, small for gestational age, gestational age at birth, preterm birth, mode of birth, shoulder dystocia, neonatal hypoglycaemia, congenital malformations, stillbirth and neonatal death. Conclusions: This COS will enable better comparison between RCTs to produce robust evidence synthesis, improve trial reporting and optimise research efficiency in studies assessing treatment of pregnant women with PGDM. Tweetable abstract: 165 key stakeholders have developed #Treatment #CoreOutcomes in pregnant women with #diabetes existing before pregnancy

A core outcome set for studies of gestational diabetes mellitus prevention and treatment

Aims/hypothesis: The aim of this systematic review was to develop core outcome sets (COSs) for trials evaluating interventions for the prevention or treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Methods: We identified previously reported outcomes through a systematic review of the literature. These outcomes were presented to key stakeholders (including patient representatives, researchers and clinicians) for prioritisation using a three-round, e-Delphi study. A priori consensus criteria informed which outcomes were brought forward for discussion at a face-to-face consensus meeting where the COS was finalised. Results: Our review identified 74 GDM prevention and 116 GDM treatment outcomes, which were presented to stakeholders in round 1 of the e-Delphi study. Round 1 was completed by 173 stakeholders, 70% (121/173) of whom went on to complete round 2; 84% (102/121) of round 2 responders completed round 3. Twenty-two GDM prevention outcomes and 30 GDM treatment outcomes were discussed at the consensus meeting. Owing to significant overlap between included prevention and treatment outcomes, consensus meeting stakeholders agreed to develop a single prevention/treatment COS. Fourteen outcomes were included in the final COS. These consisted of six maternal outcomes (GDM diagnosis, adherence to the intervention, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, requirement and type of pharmacological therapy for hyperglycaemia, gestational weight gain and mode of birth) and eight neonatal outcomes (birthweight, large for gestational age, small for gestational age, gestational age at birth, preterm birth, neonatal hypoglycaemia, neonatal death and stillbirth). Conclusions/interpretation: This COS will enable future GDM prevention and treatment trials to measure similar outcomes that matter to stakeholders and facilitate comparison and combination of these studies

A core outcome set for the treatment of pregnant women with pregestational diabetes

Objective: To develop a core outcome set (COS) for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effectiveness of interventions for the treatment of pregnant women with pregestational diabetes mellitus (PGDM). Design: A consensus developmental study. Setting: International. Population: Two hundred and five stakeholders completed the first round. Methods: The study consisted of three components. (1) A systematic review of the literature to produce a list of outcomes reported in RCTs assessing the effectiveness of intervention

International comparison of glycaemic control in people with type 1 diabetes: an update and extension

Aims: To update and extend a previous cross-sectional international comparison of glycaemic control in people with type 1 diabetes. Methods: Data were obtained for 520,392 children and adults with type 1 diabetes from 17 population and five clinic-based data sources in countries or regions between 2016 and 2020. Median HbA1c(IQR) and proportions of individuals with HbA1c<58mmol/mol (<7.5%), 58 – 74 mmol/mol (7.5 – 8.9%) and ≥ 75 mmol/mol (≥ 9.0%) were compared between populations for individuals aged <15, 15 – 24 and ≥ 25years. Logistic regression was used to estimate the odds ratio (OR) of HbA1c< 58 mmol/mol (< 7.5%) relative to ≥ 58 mmol/mol (≥ 7.5%), stratified and adjusted for sex, age, and data source. Where possible, changes in the proportion of individuals in each HbA1c category compared to previous estimates were calculated. Results: Median HbA1c varied from 55 to 79 mmol/mol (7.2 to 9.4%) across data sources and age groups so a pooled estimate was deemed inappropriate. OR (95% CI) for HbA1c< 58 mmol/mol (<7.5 %) were 0.91 (0.90 – 0.92) for women compared to men, 1.68 (1.65 – 1.71) for people aged < 15 years and 0.81 (0.79 – 0.82) aged15 – 24 years compared to those aged ≥ 25 years. Differences between populations persisted after adjusting for sex, age, and data source. In general, compared to our previous analysis, the proportion of people with an HbA1c<58 mmol/l (<7.5%) increased and proportions of people with HbA1c≥ 75 mmol/mol (≥ 9.0%) decreased. Conclusions: Glycaemic control of type 1 diabetes continues to vary substantially between age groups and data sources. While some improvement over time has been observed, glycaemic control remains sub-optimal for most people with Type 1 diabetes

International comparison of glycaemic control in people with type 1 diabetes: an update and extension

Aims: To update and extend a previous cross-sectional international comparison of glycaemic control in people with type 1 diabetes. Methods: Data were obtained for 520,392 children and adults with type 1 diabetes from 17 population and five clinic-based data sources in countries or regions between 2016 and 2020. Median HbA1c(IQR) and proportions of individuals with HbA1c &lt; 58 mmol/mol (&lt;7.5%), 58–74 mmol/mol (7.5–8.9%) and ≥75 mmol/mol (≥9.0%) were compared between populations for individuals aged &lt;15, 15–24 and ≥25 years. Logistic regression was used to estimate the odds ratio (OR) of HbA1c &lt; 58 mmol/mol (&lt;7.5%) relative to ≥58 mmol/mol (≥7.5%), stratified and adjusted for sex, age and data source. Where possible, changes in the proportion of individuals in each HbA1c category compared to previous estimates were calculated. Results: Median HbA1c varied from 55 to 79 mmol/mol (7.2 to 9.4%) across data sources and age groups so a pooled estimate was deemed inappropriate. OR (95% CI) for HbA1c&lt; 58 mmol/mol (&lt;7.5%) were 0.91 (0.90–0.92) for women compared to men, 1.68 (1.65–1.71) for people aged &lt;15 years and 0.81 (0.79–0.82) aged15–24 years compared to those aged ≥25 years. Differences between populations persisted after adjusting for sex, age and data source. In general, compared to our previous analysis, the proportion of people with an HbA1c &lt; 58 mmol/l (&lt;7.5%) increased and proportions of people with HbA1c≥ 75 mmol/mol (≥9.0%) decreased. Conclusions: Glycaemic control of type 1 diabetes continues to vary substantially between age groups and data sources. While some improvement over time has been observed, glycaemic control remains sub-optimal for most people with Type 1 diabetes. © 2021 Diabetes UK

International comparison of glycaemic control in people with type 1 diabetes: an update and extension

To update and extend a previous cross-sectional international comparison of glycaemic control in people with type 1 diabetes