uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Effects of diabetes definition on global surveillance of diabetes prevalence and diagnosis: a pooled analysis of 96 population-based studies with 331288 participants
Show others and affiliations
2015 (English)In: LANCET DIABETES & ENDOCRINOLOGY, ISSN 2213-8587, Vol. 3, no 8, 624-637 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background Diabetes has been defined on the basis of different biomarkers, including fasting plasma glucose (FPG), 2-h plasma glucose in an oral glucose tolerance test (2hOGTT), and HbA(1c). We assessed the effect of different diagnostic definitions on both the population prevalence of diabetes and the classification of previously undiagnosed individuals as having diabetes versus not having diabetes in a pooled analysis of data from population-based health examination surveys in different regions. Methods We used data from 96 population-based health examination surveys that had measured at least two of the biomarkers used for defining diabetes. Diabetes was defined using HbA(1c) (HbA(1c) >= 6 . 5% or history of diabetes diagnosis or using insulin or oral hypoglycaemic drugs) compared with either FPG only or FPG-or-2hOGTT definitions (FPG >= 7 . 0 mmol/L or 2hOGTT >= 11 . 1 mmol/L or history of diabetes or using insulin or oral hypoglycaemic drugs). We calculated diabetes prevalence, taking into account complex survey design and survey sample weights. We compared the prevalences of diabetes using different definitions graphically and by regression analyses. We calculated sensitivity and specificity of diabetes diagnosis based on HbA1c compared with diagnosis based on glucose among previously undiagnosed individuals (ie, excluding those with history of diabetes or using insulin or oral hypoglycaemic drugs). We calculated sensitivity and specificity in each survey, and then pooled results using a random-effects model. We assessed the sources of heterogeneity of sensitivity by meta-regressions for study characteristics selected a priori. Findings Population prevalence of diabetes based on FPG- or-2hOGTT was correlated with prevalence based on FPG alone (r= 0 . 98), but was higher by 2-6 percentage points at different prevalence levels. Prevalence based on HbA(1c) was lower than prevalence based on FPG in 42 . 8% of age-sex-survey groups and higher in another 41 . 6%; in the other 15 . 6%, the two definitions provided similar prevalence estimates. The variation across studies in the relation between glucose-based and HbA(1c)-based prevalences was partly related to participants' age, followed by natural logarithm of per person gross domestic product, the year of survey, mean BMI, and whether the survey population was national, subnational, or from specific communities. Diabetes defined as HbA(1c) 6 . 5% or more had a pooled sensitivity of 52 . 8% (95% CI 51 . 3-54 . 3%) and a pooled specificity of 99 . 74% (99 . 71-99 . 78%) compared with FPG 7 . 0 mmol/L or more for diagnosing previously undiagnosed participants; sensitivity compared with diabetes defined based on FPG-or-2hOGTT was 30 . 5% (28 . 7-32 . 3%). None of the preselected study-level characteristics explained the heterogeneity in the sensitivity of HbA(1c) versus FPG. Interpretation Different biomarkers and definitions for diabetes can provide different estimates of population prevalence of diabetes, and differentially identify people without previous diagnosis as having diabetes. Using an HbA(1c)-based definition alone in health surveys will not identify a substantial proportion of previously undiagnosed people who would be considered as having diabetes using a glucose-based test.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2015. Vol. 3, no 8, 624-637 p.
National Category
Endocrinology and Diabetes
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-261257DOI: 10.1016/S2213-8587(15)00129-1ISI: 000358540100018OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-261257DiVA: diva2:850091
Wellcome trust
Available from: 2015-08-31 Created: 2015-08-31 Last updated: 2016-01-18Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(390 kB)79 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 390 kBChecksum SHA-512
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Lytsy, PerSundström, Johan
By organisation
Cardiovascular epidemiologySocial MedicineCardiologyUCR-Uppsala Clinical Research Center
Endocrinology and Diabetes

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 79 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Altmetric score

Total: 346 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link