↓ Skip to main content

Feasibility, acceptability and uptake rates of gestational diabetes mellitus screening in primary care vs secondary care: findings from a randomised controlled mixed methods trial

Overview of attention for article published in Diabetologia, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
89 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Feasibility, acceptability and uptake rates of gestational diabetes mellitus screening in primary care vs secondary care: findings from a randomised controlled mixed methods trial
Published in
Diabetologia, August 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00125-015-3713-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marie Tierney, Angela O’Dea, Andriy Danyliv, Liam G. Glynn, Brian E. McGuire, Louise A Carmody, John Newell, Fidelma P. Dunne

Abstract

It is postulated that uptake rates for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) screening would be improved if offered in a setting more accessible to the patient. The aim of this study was to evaluate the proportion of uptake of GDM screening in the primary vs secondary care setting, and to qualitatively explore the providers' experiences of primary care screening provision. This mixed methods study was composed of a quantitative unblinded parallel group randomised controlled trial and qualitative interview trial. The primary outcome was the proportion of uptake of screening in both the primary and secondary care settings. All pregnant women aged 18 years or over, with sufficient English and without a diagnosis or diabetes or GDM, who attended for their first antenatal appointment at one of three hospital sites along the Irish Atlantic seaboard were eligible for inclusion in this study. Seven hundred and eighty-one pregnant women were randomised using random permutated blocks to receive a 2 h 75 g OGTT in either a primary (n = 391) or secondary care (n = 390) setting. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 13 primary care providers. Primary care providers who provided care to the population covered by the three hospital sites involved were eligible for inclusion. Statistically significant differences were found between the primary care (n = 391) and secondary care (n = 390) arms for uptake (52.7% vs 89.2%, respectively; effect size 36.5 percentage points, 95% CI 30.7, 42.4; p < 0.001), crossover (32.5% vs 2.3%, respectively; p < 0.001) and non-uptake (14.8% vs 8.5%, respectively; p = 0.005). There were no significant differences in uptake based on the presence of a practice nurse or the presence of multiple general practitioners in the primary care setting. There was evidence of significant relationship between probability of uptake of screening and age (p < 0.001). Primary care providers reported difficulties with the conduct of GDM screening, despite recognising that the community was the most appropriate location for screening. Currently, provision of GDM screening in primary care in Ireland, despite its acknowledged benefits, is unfeasible due to poor uptake rates, poor rates of primary care provider engagement and primary care provider concerns. Trial registration http://isrctn.org ISRCTN02232125 Funding This study was funded by the Health Research Board (ICE2011/03).

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 89 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 20%
Researcher 12 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 8%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 6%
Other 18 20%
Unknown 23 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 19%
Psychology 6 7%
Arts and Humanities 2 2%
Unspecified 2 2%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 25 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 July 2017.
All research outputs
#5,799,012
of 22,985,065 outputs
Outputs from Diabetologia
#2,475
of 5,085 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,457
of 264,604 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diabetologia
#23
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,985,065 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,085 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,604 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.