Maternal Race/Ethnicity and Postpartum Diabetes Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Herrick CJ
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7247031 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveTo review the evidence of the association between performance in eight indicators of diabetes care and a patient's race/ethnicity and socioeconomic characteristics.Data sourceStudies of adult patients with type 2 diabetes in MEDLINE published between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2018.Study designSystematic review and meta-analysis of regression-based studies including race/ethnicity and income or education as explanatory variables. Meta-analysis was used to quantify differences in performance associated with patient race/ethnicity or socioeconomic characteristics. The systematic review was used to identify potential mechanisms of disparities.Data collectionTwo coauthors separately conducted abstract screening, study exclusions, data extraction, and scoring of retained studies. Estimates in retained studies were extracted and, where applicable, were standardized and converted to odds ratios and standard errors.Principal findingsPerformance in intermediate outcomes and process measures frequently exhibited differences by race/ethnicity even after adjustment for socioeconomic, lifestyle, and health factors. Meta-analyses showed black patients had lower odds of HbA1c and blood pressure (BP) control (OR range: 0.67-0.68, P < .05) but higher odds of receiving eye or foot examination (OR range: 1.22-1.47, P < .05) relative to white patients. A high school degree or more was associated with higher odds of HbA1c control and receipt of eye examinations compared to patients without a degree. Meta-analyses of income included a handful of studies and were inconsistently associated with diabetes care performance. Differences in diabetes performance appear to be related to access-related factors such as uninsurance or lacking a usual source of care; food insecurity and trade-offs at very low incomes; and lower adherence among younger and healthier diabetes patients.ConclusionsPatient race/ethnicity and education were associated with differences in diabetes quality measures. Depending on the approach used to rate providers, not adjusting for these patient characteristics may penalize or reward providers based on the populations they serve.
| S-EPMC7518886 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe consistency of cardiovascular risk reduction by antidiabetes medications across racial and ethnic groups remains unclear. The aim of this study was to analyze racial/ethnic patterns in the results of cardiovascular outcomes trials of antidiabetes medications in people with type 2 diabetes.MethodPubMed and Cochrane library databases were searched from the inception dates to December 2020. Cardiovascular outcome trials in type 2 diabetes that randomized participants to antidiabetes medication or control treatment and reported results by race/ethnic groups or region were included.ResultsA total of 19 studies were included in this meta-analysis. Among White participants, treatment with antidiabetes medications significantly decreased the risk of composite cardiovascular outcomes when compared with placebo treatment (OR = 0.88, 95% CI 0.83-0.94, p < 0.05). Among Asian participants, antidiabetes medications also significantly decreased the risk of composite cardiovascular outcomes when compared with control treatment (OR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.74-0.86, p < 0.05). A similar pattern was found when analyzing the effects of antidiabetes medications vs. control treatment in other racial/ethnic groups comprising mostly Hispanics and Pacific Islanders (OR = 0.87, 95% CI 0.78-0.98, p < 0.05). However, among Black participants, treatment with antidiabetes medications resulted in nominal but non-significant decreases in the composite cardiovascular outcomes when compared with control treatment (OR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.62-1.14, p = 0.26).ConclusionsThe present meta-analysis showed cardiovascular safety of antidiabetes medications in people with type 2 diabetes from all racial/ethnic groups studied; however, significant composite cardiovascular risk reductions were demonstrated only in White and Asian participants. To determine whether antidiabetes drugs confer consistent cardiovascular benefits in Black and other racial/ethnic participants requires more investigations in the future.
| S-EPMC8349866 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Accurate identification of independent predictors of stillbirth is needed to define preventive strategies. We aim to examine the independent contribution of maternal race in the risk of stillbirth after adjusting for maternal characteristics and medical history. There are two components to the study: first, prospective screening in 168,966 women with singleton pregnancies coordinated by the Fetal Medicine Foundation (FMF) and second, a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting on race and stillbirth. In the FMF study, logistic regression analysis found that in black women, the risk of stillbirth, after adjustment for confounders, was higher than in white women (odds ratio 1.78, 95% confidence interval 1.50 to 2.11). The risk for other racial groups was not significantly different. The literature search identified 20 studies that provided data on over 6,500,000 pregnancies, but only 10 studies provided risks adjusted for some maternal characteristics; consequently, the majority of these studies did not provide accurate contribution of different racial groups to the prediction of stillbirth. It is concluded that in women of black origin, the risk of stillbirth, after adjustment for confounders, is about twofold higher than in white women. Consequently, closer surveillance should be granted for these women.
| S-EPMC9224577 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceCOVID-19 has disproportionately affected racial and ethnic minority groups, and race and ethnicity have been associated with disease severity. However, the association of socioeconomic determinants with racial disparities in COVID-19 outcomes remains unclear.ObjectiveTo evaluate the association of race and ethnicity with COVID-19 outcomes and to examine the association between race, ethnicity, COVID-19 outcomes, and socioeconomic determinants.Data sourcesA systematic search of PubMed, medRxiv, bioRxiv, Embase, and the World Health Organization COVID-19 databases was performed for studies published from January 1, 2020, to January 6, 2021.Study selectionStudies that reported data on associations between race and ethnicity and COVID-19 positivity, disease severity, and socioeconomic status were included and screened by 2 independent reviewers. Studies that did not have a satisfactory quality score were excluded. Overall, less than 1% (0.47%) of initially identified studies met selection criteria.Data extraction and synthesisPreferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Associations were assessed using adjusted and unadjusted risk ratios (RRs) and odds ratios (ORs), combined prevalence, and metaregression. Data were pooled using a random-effects model.Main outcomes and measuresThe main measures were RRs, ORs, and combined prevalence values.ResultsA total of 4 318 929 patients from 68 studies were included in this meta-analysis. Overall, 370 933 patients (8.6%) were African American, 9082 (0.2%) were American Indian or Alaska Native, 101 793 (2.4%) were Asian American, 851 392 identified as Hispanic/Latino (19.7%), 7417 (0.2%) were Pacific Islander, 1 037 996 (24.0%) were White, and 269 040 (6.2%) identified as multiracial and another race or ethnicity. In age- and sex-adjusted analyses, African American individuals (RR, 3.54; 95% CI, 1.38-9.07; P = .008) and Hispanic individuals (RR, 4.68; 95% CI, 1.28-17.20; P = .02) were the most likely to test positive for COVID-19. Asian American individuals had the highest risk of intensive care unit admission (RR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.60-2.34, P < .001). The area deprivation index was positively correlated with mortality rates in Asian American and Hispanic individuals (P < .001). Decreased access to clinical care was positively correlated with COVID-19 positivity in Hispanic individuals (P < .001) and African American individuals (P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, members of racial and ethnic minority groups had higher risks of COVID-19 positivity and disease severity. Furthermore, socioeconomic determinants were strongly associated with COVID-19 outcomes in racial and ethnic minority populations.
| S-EPMC8586903 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Although diabetes is rapidly increasing in India, there is no national consensus on best practices for screening, diagnosis, and management of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). The goal of this study was to systematically review the literature for studies reporting the prevalence and screening and diagnostic methods for gestational diabetes in India.We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and POPLINE for studies on screening for GDM in India. We included English-language full reports and conference abstracts of cross-sectional studies, prospective, and retrospective cohorts that reported the screening method and prevalence of GDM. We performed descriptive analysis on all studies and meta-analysis, meta-regression, and subgroup meta-analysis on studies with medium or low risk of bias.We included 64 studies reporting 90 prevalence estimates. Prevalence estimates ranged from 0 to 41.9%. Subset meta-analyses showed that the IADPSG diagnostic criteria found significantly more GDM cases (prevalence = 19.19% [15.5, 23.6], p < 0.05) than the WHO 1999 criteria (10.13% [8.17, 12.50]) and DIPSI criteria (7.37% [5.2, 10.16]). Studies that compared the IADPSG and WHO 1999 criteria showed poor positive agreement (33-79%). Studies specifying time of GDM diagnosis showed that patients (11-60%) develop GDM as early as the first trimester, but many GDM cases (16-40%) are missed if screened only at first visit.In India, prevalence estimates of GDM vary substantially by diagnostic criteria. When evaluating screening and diagnostic criteria for GDM, providers should consider their patients' needs and correlate screening criteria with pregnancy outcomes.
| S-EPMC5999405 | biostudies-other
Project description:OBJECTIVES: Low glycaemic index (GI) foods are recommended to improve glycaemic control in diabetes; however, Health Canada considers that GI food labeling would be misleading and unhelpful, in part, because selected studies suggest that GI values are inaccurate due to an effect of ethnicity. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the GI of foods when measured in Caucasians versus non-Caucasians. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases for relevant articles. GI differences were aggregated using the generic inverse variance method (random effects model) and expressed as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Study quality was assessed based on how well studies complied with official international GI methodology. RESULTS: Review of 1288 trials revealed eight eligible studies, including 28 comparisons of GI among 585 non-Caucasians and 971 Caucasians. Overall, there was borderline significant evidence of higher GI in non-Caucasians than Caucasians (MD, 3.3 (95% CI, -0.1, 6.8); P=0.06) with significant heterogeneity (I(2), 46%; P=0.005). The GI of eight types of rice was higher in non-Caucasians than Caucasians (MD, 9.5 (95% CI, 3.7, 23.1); P=0.001), but there was no significant difference for the other 20 foods (MD, 1.0 (95% CI, -2.5, 4.6); P=0.57). MD was significantly greater in the four low-quality studies (nine comparisons) than the four high-quality studies (19 comparisons; 7.8 vs 0.7, P=0.047). CONCLUSIONS: With the possible exception of rice, existing evidence suggests that GI values do not differ when measured in Caucasians versus non-Caucasians. To confirm these findings high-quality studies using a wide range of foods are required.
| S-EPMC4521176 | biostudies-other
Project description:Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is a metabolic complication associated with adverse outcomes for mother and fetus. Arsenic (As) exposure has been suggested as a possible risk factor for its development. The aim of this meta-analysis was to provide a comprehensive overview of published evidence on the association between As and GDM. The systematic search from PubMed, MEDLINE, and Scopus was limited to full-length manuscripts published in peer-reviewed journals up to April 2020, identifying fifty articles. Ten studies met the inclusion criteria, nine for quantitative synthesis with a total of n = 1984 GDM cases. The overall pooled risk was 1.56 (95% Confidence Interval - CI = 1.23, 1.99) with moderate heterogeneity (χ2 = 21.95; I2% = 64). Several differences among the included studies that may account for heterogeneity were investigated. Stratification for exposure indicator confirmed a positive association for studies assessing urine As. A slightly higher risk was detected pooling studies based in Asia rather than in North America. Stratification for GDM diagnostic criteria showed higher risks when diagnosis was made according to the Canadian Diabetes Association (CDA-SOGC) or World Health Organization (WHO) criteria, whereas a lower risk was observed when adopting the American Diabetes Association (ADA) criteria. These results provide additional evidence for a possible association between As exposure and GDM, although the data need to be interpreted with caution due to heterogeneity.
| S-EPMC7600218 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Aims/hypothesisDisparities in HbA1c levels have been observed among ethnic groups. Most studies were performed in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM), which may interfere with results due to the high variability of glucose levels. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effect of ethnicity on HbA1c levels in individuals without DM.MethodsThis is a systematic review with meta-analysis. We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE up to September 2016. Studies published after 1996, performed in adults without DM, reporting HbA1c results measured by certified/standardized methods were included. A random effects model was used and the effect size was presented as weighted HbA1c mean difference (95% CI) between different ethnicities as compared to White ethnicity.ResultsTwelve studies met the inclusion criteria, totalling data from 49,238 individuals. There were significant differences between HbA1c levels in Blacks [0.26% (2.8 mmol/mol); 95% CI 0.18 to 0.33 (2.0 to 3.6), p <0.001; I2 = 90%, p <0.001], Asians [0.24% (2.6 mmol/mol); 95% CI 0.16 to 0.33 (1.7 to 3.6), p <0.001; I2 = 80%, p = 0.0006] and Latinos [0.08% (0.9 mmol/mol); IC 95% 0.06 to 0.10 (0.7 to 1.1); p <0.001; I2 = 0%; p = 0.72] when compared to Whites.Conclusions/interpretationThis meta-analysis shows that, in individuals without DM, HbA1c values are higher in Blacks, Asians, and Latinos when compared to White persons. Although small, these differences might have impact on the use of a sole HbA1c point to diagnose DM in all ethnic populations.
| S-EPMC5305058 | biostudies-literature
Project description:UnlabelledPOLICY POINTS: Racial/ethnic differences in the overuse of care (specifically, unneeded care that does not improve patients' outcomes) have received little scholarly attention. Our systematic review of the literature (59 studies) found that the overuse of care is not invariably associated with race/ethnicity, but when it was, a substantial proportion of studies found greater overuse of care among white patients. The absence of established subject terms in PubMed for the overuse of care or inappropriate care impedes the ability of researchers or policymakers to synthesize prior scientific or policy efforts.ContextThe literature on disparities in health care has examined the contrast between white patients receiving needed care, compared with racial/ethnic minority patients not receiving needed care. Racial/ethnic differences in the overuse of care, that is, unneeded care that does not improve patients' outcomes, have received less attention. We systematically reviewed the literature regarding race/ethnicity and the overuse of care.MethodsWe searched the Medline database for US studies that included at least 2 racial/ethnic groups and that examined the association between race/ethnicity and the overuse of procedures, diagnostic (care) or therapeutic care. In a recent review, we identified studies of overuse by race/ethnicity, and we also examined reference lists of retrieved articles. We then abstracted and evaluated this information, including the population studied, data source, sample size and assembly, type of care, guideline or appropriateness standard, controls for clinical confounding and financing of care, and findings.FindingsWe identified 59 unique studies, of which 11 had a low risk of methodological bias. Studies with multiple outcomes were counted more than once; collectively they assessed 74 different outcomes. Thirty-two studies, 6 with low risks of bias (LRoB), provided evidence that whites received more inappropriate or nonrecommended care than racial/ethnic minorities did. Nine studies (2 LRoB) found evidence of more overuse of care by minorities than by whites. Thirty-three studies (6 LRoB) found no relationship between race/ethnicity and overuse.ConclusionsAlthough the overuse of care is not invariably associated with race/ethnicity, when it was, a substantial proportion of studies found greater overuse of care among white patients. Clinicians and researchers should try to understand how and why race/ethnicity might be associated with overuse and to intervene to reduce it.
| S-EPMC4364433 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWomen with disabilities are increasingly becoming pregnant, and growing evidence suggests maternal disability may be associated with increased risk for perinatal complications.ObjectiveA systematic review and meta-analysis were undertaken to examine the association between maternal disabilities and risk for perinatal complications.Study designMedline, CINAHL, EMBASE, and PsycINFO were searched from inception to July 2018 for full-text publications in English on pregnancy, delivery, and postpartum complications in women with any disability and those with physical, sensory, and intellectual and developmental disabilities specifically. Searches were limited to quantitative studies with a comparison group of women without disabilities. Reviewers used standardized instruments to extract data from and assess the quality of included studies. Pooled odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were generated using DerSimonian and Laird random effects models for outcomes with data available from ≥3 studies.ResultsThe review included 23 studies, representing 8,514,356 women in 19 cohorts. Women with sensory (pooled unadjusted odds ratio, 2.85, 95% confidence interval, 0.79-10.31) and intellectual and developmental disabilities (pooled unadjusted odds ratio, 1.10, 95% confidence interval, 0.76-1.58) had elevated but not statistically significant risk for gestational diabetes. Women with any disability (pooled unadjusted odds ratio, 1.45, 95% confidence interval, 1.16-1.82) and intellectual and developmental disabilities (pooled unadjusted odds ratio, 1.77, 95% confidence interval, 1.21-2.60) had increased risk for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy; risk was elevated but not statistically significant for women with sensory disabilities (pooled unadjusted odds ratio, 2.84, 95% confidence interval, 0.85-9.43). Women with any (pooled unadjusted odds ratio, 1.31, 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.68), physical (pooled unadjusted odds ratio, 1.60, 95% confidence interval, 1.21-2.13), and intellectual and developmental disabilities (pooled unadjusted odds ratio, 1.29, 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.63) had increased risk for cesarean delivery; risk among women with sensory disabilities was elevated but not statistically significant (pooled unadjusted odds ratio, 1.28, 95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.93). There was heterogeneity in all analyses, and 13 studies had weak-quality ratings, with lack of control for confounding being the most common limitation.ConclusionEvidence that maternal disability is associated with increased risk for perinatal complications demonstrates that more high-quality research is needed to examine the reasons for this risk and to determine what interventions could be implemented to support women with disabilities during the perinatal period.
| S-EPMC6937395 | biostudies-literature