Systematic review of the use of metformin compared to insulin for the management of gestational diabetes: Implications for low-resource settings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: This systematic review examines the effectiveness of metformin treatment compared to insulin treatment for gestational diabetes within the context of a low-resource environment. Methods: Electronic data searches of Medline, EMBASE, Scopus and Google scholar databases from 1 January, 2005 to 30 June, 2021 were performed using medical subject headings: 'gestational diabetes or pregnancy diabetes mellitus' AND 'Pregnancy or pregnancy outcomes' AND 'Insulin' AND 'Metformin Hydrochloride Drug Combination/or Metformin/or Hypoglycemic Agents' AND 'Glycemic control or blood glucose'. Randomized controlled trials were included if: participants were pregnant women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM); the interventions were metformin and/or insulin. Studies among women with pre-gestational diabetes, non-randomised control trials or studies with a limited description of the methodology were excluded. Outcomes included adverse maternal outcomes: weight gain, C-section, pre-eclampsia and glycaemic control and adverse neonatal outcomes: birth weight, macrosomia, pre-term birth and neonatal hypoglycaemia. The revised Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment for randomised trials was used for the evaluation of bias. Results: We screened 164 abstracts and 36 full-text articles. Fourteen studies met the inclusion criteria. The studies provide moderate to high-quality evidence demonstrating the effectiveness of metformin as an alternative therapy to insulin. Risk of bias was low; multiple countries and robust sample sizes improved external validity. All studies were from urban centres with no rural data. Conclusion: These recent high quality studies comparing metformin to insulin for the treatment of GDM generally found either improved or equivalent pregnancy outcome and good glycaemic control for most patients, although many required insulin supplementation. Its ease of use, safety and efficacy suggest metformin may simplify the management of gestational diabetes, particularly in rural and other low-resource environments.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.036 | 0.164 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.012 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".