Risk Factors for Hyperglycaemia in Pregnancy in Tamil Nadu, India

Karoline Kragelund Nielsen, Peter Damm, Anil Kapur, Vijayam Balaji, Madhuri S Balaji, Veerasamy Seshiah and Ib C Bygbjerg

PLOS ONE, 2016, vol. 11, issue 3, 1-18

Abstract: Introduction: Hyperglycaemia in pregnancy (HIP), i.e. gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and diabetes in pregnancy (DIP), increases the risk of various short- and long-term adverse outcomes. However, much remains to be understood about the role of different risk factors in development of HIP. Objective: The aims of this observational study were to examine the role of potential risk factors for HIP, and to investigate whether any single or accumulated risk factor(s) could be used to predict HIP among women attending GDM screening at three centres in urban, semi-urban and rural Tamil Nadu, India. Methodology: Pregnant women underwent a 75 g oral glucose tolerance test. Data on potential risk factors was collected and analysed using logistical regression analysis. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, sensitivity, specificity and predictive values were calculated for significant risk factors and a risk factor scoring variable was constructed. Results: HIP was prevalent in 18.9% of the study population (16.3% GDM; 2.6% DIP). Increasing age and BMI as well as having a mother only or both parents with diabetes were significant independent risk factors for HIP. Among women attending the rural health centre a doubling of income corresponded to an 80% increased risk of HIP (OR 1.80, 95%CI 1.10–2.93; p = 0.019), whereas it was not significantly associated with HIP among women attending the other health centres. The performance of the individual risk factors and the constructed scoring variable differed substantially between the three health centres, but none of them were good enough to discriminate between those with and without HIP. Conclusions: The findings highlight the importance of socio-economic circumstances and intergenerational risk transmission in the occurrence of HIP as well as the need for universal screening.

Date: 2016
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0151311 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 51311&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0151311

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0151311

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone (plosone@plos.org).