Table 4 Results of heterogeneity and publication bias estimation and subgroup meta-analysis for prevalence of gestational diabetes based on various GDM screening threshold group among pregnant women in different geographic regions
Regions | GDM diagnostic threshold subgroup | Number of studies included | Begg’s test P-value | I2% | Pooled measure of GDM (95% CI) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | 1 | 1 | – | – | 0.058 (0.039–0.076) |
2 | – | – | – | – | |
3 | 1 | – | – | 0.076 (0.072–0.080) | |
4 | – | – | – | – | |
5 | 9 | 0.602 | 99 | 0.054 (0.054–0.054) | |
6 | 6 | 0.851 | 98 | 0.029 (0.028–0.029) | |
7 | 1 | – | – | 0.017 (0.016–0.019) | |
Overall | 18 | 0.692 | 99 | 0.045 (0.044–0.045) | |
B | 1 | 6 | 0.850 | 99 | 0.152 (0.147–0.157) |
2 | – | – | – | – | |
3 | 5 | 0.625 | 99 | 0.094 (0.090–0.097) | |
4 | – | – | – | – | |
5 | – | – | – | – | |
6 | – | – | – | – | |
7 | – | – | – | – | |
Overall | 11 | 0.258 | 99 | 0.114 (0.111–0.117) | |
C | 1 | – | – | – | – |
2 | 7 | 0.625 | 99 | 0.036 (0.036–0.037) | |
3 | – | – | – | – | |
4 | – | – | – | – | |
5 | – | – | – | – | |
6 | – | – | – | – | |
7 | – | – | – | – | |
Overall | 7 | 0.625 | 99 | 0.036 (0.036–0.037) | |
D | 1 | 4 | 0.090 | 99 | 0.078 (0.076–0.081) |
2 | 1 | – | – | 0.045 (0.044–0.046) | |
3 | – |  | – | – | |
4 | – |  | – | – | |
5 | 2 | 0.317 | 99 | 0.053 (0.050–0.056) | |
6 | – | – | – | – | |
7 | 2 | 0.317 | 91 | 0.072 (0.070–0.075) | |
Overall | 9 | 0.051 | 99 | 0.055 (0.054–0.056) | |
E | 1 | 7 | 0.293 | 99 | 0.108 (0.107–0.108) |
2 | – | – | – | – | |
3 | 2 | 0.317 | 98 | 0.194 (0.175–0.213) | |
4 | 2 | 0.317 | 0 | 0.022 (0.022–0.023) | |
5 | – | – | – | – | |
6 | – | – | – | – | |
7 | 1 | – | – | 0.012 (0.009–0.015) | |
Overall | 12 | 0.520 | 100 | 0.060 (0.059–0.060) |