Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Cross-sectional study estimates GDM prevalence and identifies associated factors in rural pregnant women, highlighting preventability.
Background: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) presents a significant health challenge impacting one in six expectant mothers worldwide. GDM can cause life-threatening complications for both mother and child. As GDM is preventable, recognizing its prevalence and risk factors as early as possible is crucial for averting complications. Objectives: This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of GDM and identify the factors associated with it in the Juan block of the Sonepat District, Haryana. Methods: This facility-based cross-sectional study was conducted in the Juan block, which serves as the rural field practice area for the Department of Community Medicine, Bhagat Phool Singh Government Medical College for Women, Khanpur Kalan, Sonepat District, Haryana, India, among pregnant women residing in the study area for at least 6 months. Presuming a 13.9% GDM prevalence, the sample size was calculated using the formula: n = ([ Z 2 × p × q ]/l 2 ). Subsequently, the sample size was determined to be 520 participants. Community Health Center Juan had six Primary Health Centers (PHCs), two of which were randomly selected using the lottery method. Of the participants, 50% (260) were taken from one PHC (called Juan), and the remaining 50% were obtained from PHC Mahra. Data were analyzed using R software. Results: A single test procedure (Diabetes in Pregnancy Study group in India criteria) revealed an 11.9% GDM prevalence rate. The mean age of the participants was 24.17 ± 3.48 years. Factors, including advanced maternal age, low socioeconomic status, multiparity, early childbirth, passive smoking, increased sun exposure, family history of diabetes, prior macrosomia, overweight status, and anemia, were strong independent predictors of GDM. Conclusion: This study revealed that the GDM prevalence was 11.9%.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yadav et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: