Summary of findings for the main comparison.
Self‐monitoring compared to standard care for women with pre‐existing diabetes
| Self‐monitoring compared to standard care for women with pre‐existing diabetes | ||||||
| Patient or population: women with pre‐existing diabetes Setting: one study in the USA Intervention: self‐monitoring Comparison: standard care | ||||||
| Outcomes | Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | № of participants (studies) | Quality of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments | |
| Risk with standard care | Risk with self‐monitoring | |||||
| Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: pre‐eclampsia | Study population | (0 studies) | The included study did not report this outcome. | |||
| Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: gestational hypertension | Study population | (0 studies) | The included study did not report this outcome. | |||
| Caesarean section | Study population | RR 0.78 (0.40 to 1.49) | 28 (1 RCT) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ VERY LOW 1 2 | ||
| 643 per 1000 | 501 per 1000 (257 to 958) | |||||
| Glycaemic control during/end of treatment: Maternal HbA1c (%) | The mean maternal HbA1c was 7.2% | The mean maternal HbA1c with self‐monitoring was 0.10 lower (1.93 lower to 1.73 higher) | 28 (1 RCT) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ VERY LOW 1 3 | ||
| Glycaemic control during/end of treatment: Maternal post‐prandial blood glucose (mmmol/L) | The mean maternal post‐prandial blood glucose was 5.3 mmol/L | MD 0.70 lower (2.15 lower to 0.75 higher) | 13 (1 RCT) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ VERY LOW 1 3 | ||
| Large‐for‐gestational age | Study population | (0 studies) | The included study did not report this outcome. | |||
| Perinatal mortality | Study population | RR 3.00 (0.13 to 67.91) | 28 (1 RCT) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ VERY LOW 1 2 | There were no events in the standard care group and so anticipated absolute effects could not be calculated. | |
| 0 per 1000 | 0 per 1000 (0 to 0) | |||||
| Preterm birth less than 37 weeks' gestation | Study population | (0 studies) | The included study did not report this outcome. | |||
| Preterm birth less than 34 weeks' gestation | Study population | (0 studies) | The included study did not report this outcome. | |||
| *The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio | ||||||
| GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High quality: We are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect Moderate quality: We are moderately confident in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different Low quality: Our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: The true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect Very low quality: We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect | ||||||
1 One study with design limitations.
2 Wide CI crossing the line of no effect, few events and small sample size.
3 Wide CI crossing the line of no effect, and small sample size.