Diagnosing gestational diabetes: can expert opinions replace scientific evidence?

被引:0
|
作者
H. Long
机构
[1] Laval Health and Social Services Center,Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Medicine
[2] Laval Regional Diabetes Center,Endocrinology and Metabolism
[3] Montreal’s University Hospital Center (CHUM),undefined
来源
Diabetologia | 2011年 / 54卷
关键词
Diagnostic controversy; Diagnostic criteria; Evidence-based medicine; Experts consensus; Gestational diabetes; Macrosomia; Medicalisation; Observational studies; Pregnancy; Preventive medicine;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Preventive medical interventions should be based on the highest level of scientific evidence. Actual criteria for diagnosing gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) are neither uniform nor based on pregnancy outcomes. An expert panel from the International Association of Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Groups recently proposed that all pregnant women undergo a one-step 75 g OGTT, and defined new lower cut-off points to diagnose GDM (Metzger BE et al. Diabetes Care 33: 676–682). These criteria will double the prevalence of GDM, as 18% of all pregnant women will be labelled as abnormal. A recent article in Diabetologia (Ryan EA 54:480–486) claimed that maternal glucose is a weak predictor of big babies, that a single OGTT is poorly reproducible, and that expected benefits from intervention would be, at best, modest. This Commentary discusses other objections and argues that guidelines on any new GDM diagnostic strategy should be based on the results of randomised controlled trials rather than on disputable expert opinions.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [22] Second opinions in markets for expert services: Experimental evidence
    Mimra, Wanda
    Rasch, Alexander
    Waibel, Christian
    JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC BEHAVIOR & ORGANIZATION, 2016, 131 : 106 - 125
  • [23] Expert Scientific Evidence in a Broader Context
    Donoghue, Joan E.
    JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL DISPUTE SETTLEMENT, 2018, 9 (03): : 379 - 387
  • [24] EXPERT SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE IN THE ISRAELI COURT
    Sahar, A.
    MEDICINE AND LAW, 2007, 26 (02): : 257 - 282
  • [25] Scientific reasoning in legal expert opinions for the Federal Employers' Liability Insurance
    Stengel, D.
    Bauwens, K.
    Casper, D.
    Ekkernkamp, A.
    Wich, M.
    TRAUMA UND BERUFSKRANKHEIT, 2006, 8 (04) : 251 - 256
  • [26] Gray zones on diabetes mellitus in cardiology. Expert opinions
    Trevisan, Roberto
    Grosu, Aurelia
    Avogaro, Angelo
    Agostoni, Piergiuseppe
    Ceconi, Claudio
    Genovese, Stefano
    Bossi, Antonio
    Piti, Antonio
    Senni, Michele
    Maggioni, Aldo Pietro
    GIORNALE ITALIANO DI CARDIOLOGIA, 2020, 21 (12) : 916 - 922
  • [27] GESTATIONAL DIABETES - CAN EPIDEMIOLOGY HELP
    KEEN, H
    DIABETES, 1991, 40 : 3 - 7
  • [28] Can adiponectin predict gestational diabetes?
    Weerakiet, Sawaek
    Lertnarkorn, Kanyarat
    Panburana, Panyu
    Pitakitronakorn, Somsri
    Vesathada, Kanokwan
    Wansumrith, Surapee
    GYNECOLOGICAL ENDOCRINOLOGY, 2006, 22 (07) : 362 - 368
  • [29] Can dancing replace scientific approach:: Lost (again) in chimpocentrism
    Miklósi, A
    BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES, 2002, 25 (05) : 633 - +
  • [30] Clinical practice guidelines in the witness box: Can they replace the medical expert?
    Tibballs, James
    JOURNAL OF LAW AND MEDICINE, 2007, 14 (04) : 479 - 500