Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Oct 16;5(10):e0004696.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0004696. eCollection 2025.

Hyperglycemia in pregnancy: A sensitivity analysis study of two recommended screening tests in Tanzania

Affiliations

Hyperglycemia in pregnancy: A sensitivity analysis study of two recommended screening tests in Tanzania

Amani Idris Kikula et al. PLOS Glob Public Health. .

Abstract

Screening for hyperglycaemia in pregnancy (HIP) is an entry point to a healthy pregnancy and childbirth for both the woman and child, and offers a window of opportunity for the prevention of cardio-metabolic complications over the life-course of the woman and newborn. In Tanzania, two different screening algorithms to identify women with HIP are recommended, with no clear understanding of which performs better. We aimed to determine the prevalence of hyperglycemia in pregnancy (HIP) among antenatal care (ANC) attendees and the accuracy of HIP screening tests. A cross-sectional study design involving 970 women attending ANC clinic was done in two district hospitals (Mbagala Rangi Tatu and Kisarawe) of Tanzania between June and October 2024. Socio-demographic, obstetric characteristics, and anthropometric parameters were obtained from study participants. A checklist screening test (CST) for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), defined by the Tanzanian standard treatment guideline, was used. We tested for glycosuria and two-hour 75-gram oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) on every study participant. We conducted descriptive statistics and sensitivity analysis to determine the prevalence of HIP and assess the screening performance of CST and glycosuria test against OGTT using World Health Organization 2013 diagnostic criteria for GDM. The prevalence of HIP was 10% (7.9% GDM and 2.1% diabetes in pregnancy). Glycosuria test missed all women with GDM and could identify only 20% with diabetes in pregnancy. The CST had a sensitivity and specificity of 72.2% (62.1-80.8, 95%CI) and 32.4% (29.3-35.6, 95%CI), respectively, while the glycosuria test had 4.1% (1.1-10.2, 95%CI) and 97.1% (95.8-98.1, 95%CI). The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve for both the CST 0.523 (0.48-0.57,95%CI) and glycosuria test 0.506 (0.49-0.53,95%CI) was low, indicating their poor discriminatory performance for HIP. One in every ten women had HIP. The CST is a better first-step screening test than the glycosuria test based on sensitivity.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Description of recruitment of study participants and study procedures.
The results of the glycosuria test and the blood glucose test were documented in the study request form and the ANC record. A member of the research team also communicated the test results to the woman and the ANC clinic staff.
Fig 2
Fig 2. Study flowchart for inclusion of study participants for analysis.
Out of the 970 women included in the final analysis sample, 68.7% (666 women) were recruited at Mbagala Rangi Tatu Hospital (Table 3). Just half (52.2%) of the study participants were in the 20–29-years age group. A total of 40.2% had attained secondary school-level education and the majority (91.6%) were either married or living with a partner. About two-thirds (56.4%) had a BMI of ≥25 kg/m2 and 4.1% were HIV-positive.
Fig 3
Fig 3. Receiver observer characteristics curve comparing checklist screening test and glycosuria tests for Hyperglycemia in pregnancy.

References

    1. Trends in maternal mortality 2000 to 2020: estimates by WHO, UNICEF, UNFPA, World Bank Group and UNDESA/Population Division [Internet]. [cited 2025 Jan 7]. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240068759
    1. Chaves SDC, Cecatti JG, Carroli G, Lumbiganon P, Hogue CJ, Mori R, et al. Obstetric transition in the World Health Organization Multicountry Survey on Maternal and Newborn Health: exploring pathways for maternal mortality reduction. Rev Panam Salud Publica. 2015;37(4–5):203–10. - PubMed
    1. Souza JP, Tunçalp Ö, Vogel JP, Bohren M, Widmer M, Oladapo OT, et al. Obstetric transition: the pathway towards ending preventable maternal deaths. BJOG. 2014;121(Suppl 1):1–4. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.12735 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cresswell JA, Alexander M, Chong MYC, Link HM, Pejchinovska M, Gazeley U, et al. Global and regional causes of maternal deaths 2009-20: a WHO systematic analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2025;13(4):e626–34. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(24)00560-6 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Vasileva LV, Marchev AS, Georgiev MI. Causes and solutions to “globesity”: The new fa(s)t alarming global epidemic. Food Chem Toxicol. 2018;121:173–93. doi: 10.1016/j.fct.2018.08.071 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources