INTRODUCTION Adopting the modified International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria for diagnosing gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) will increase the prevalence of GDM resulting in increased resource utilisation and an unknown effect on clinical outcomes. AIMS To determine the prevalence of GDM by the modified IADPSG criteria and compare characteristics an...

PURPOSE OF REVIEW This paper seeks to summarize the impact of the one-step International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) versus the two-step gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) criteria with regard to prevalence, outcomes, healthcare delivery, and long-term maternal metabolic risk. RECENT FINDINGS Studies demonstrate a 1.03-3.78-fold rise in the prevalence of GDM w...

AIMS/INTRODUCTION The International Association of the Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Group (IADPSG) criteria for gestational diabetes are associated with increased prevalence. However, it remains unknown if intervention for more women with gestational diabetes mellitus by the IADPSG criteria results in better pregnancy outcomes than adopting the Carpenter and Coustan (C&C) criteria in Asian popu...

BACKGROUND In 2010, the International Association of the Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) recommended a new strategy for the screening and diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). However, no study has indicated that adopting the IADPSG recommendations improves perinatal outcomes. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of implementing the IADPSG criteria fo...

AIM We aimed to compare the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) and the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria to diagnose gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in Chennai, India. MATERIALS AND METHODS We reviewed the retrospective data of 1351 pregnant women who underwent screening for GDM at four selected diabetes centers at Chennai (three private and o...

IN BRIEF Traditional methods of screening for and diagnosing gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) have been challenged, leading to the development of new screening guidelines by the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG). This study is a retrospective comparison of pregnancy outcomes based on the Carpenter and Coustan (CC) and IADPSG screening guidelines. It de...

BACKGROUND Controversy surrounds the decision to adopt the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria for the diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) as fears that disease prevalence rates will soar have been raised. AIMS To investigate the prevalence of pregnancy complicated with GDM before and after the introduction of the IADPSG 2010 diagnos...

OBJECTIVE The International Association of the Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) recently recommended new criteria for diagnosing gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). This study was undertaken to determine whether adopting the IADPSG criteria would be cost-effective, compared with the current standard of care. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We developed a decision analysis model compa...

OBJECTIVE To assess the frequency of adverse outcomes for women who are diagnosed with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) by the International Association of the Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) criteria using data from the Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome (HAPO) study. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS This is a secondary analysis from the North American HAPO study centers....

OBJECTIVE The International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) recently proposed new criteria for diagnosing gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). We compared prevalence rates, risk factors, and the effect of ethnicity using the World Health Organization (WHO) and modified IADPSG criteria. METHODS This was a population-based cohort study of 823 (74% of eligible) health...