Diabetes Care
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Shaw, J. E.
Right arrow Articles by Zimmet, P. Z.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Shaw, J. E.
Right arrow Articles by Zimmet, P. Z.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Diabetes Care, Vol 22, Issue 5 762-766, Copyright © 1999 by American Diabetes Association

ARTICLES

Impact of new diagnostic criteria for diabetes on different populations

JE Shaw, M de Courten, EJ Boyko and PZ Zimmet
International Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, Australia. jshaw@idi.org.au

OBJECTIVE: For epidemiological purposes, it has now been recommended that a fasting plasma glucose value of 7.0 mmol/l can be used to diagnose diabetes, instead of a 2-h value of 11.1 mmol/l. This study assesses the impact of making this change on the prevalence of diabetes and on the phenotype of individuals identified. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Data were collated from nine population based southern hemisphere studies in which a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test was performed. Comparisons were made between the prevalence derived from fasting values only and the prevalence derived from 2-h values only. Cardiovascular risk was assessed in all individuals. RESULTS: There were 20,624 subjects in the nine surveys of whom 1,036 had previously diagnosed diabetes and 1,714 had newly diagnosed diabetes, according to either fasting or 2-h glucose. The differences in prevalence within each population resulting from changing the diagnostic criteria ranged from +30 to -19% (relative difference) and +4.1 percentage points to -2.8 percentage points (absolute difference). BMI was the most important determinant of disagreement in classification. A total of 31% of those individuals who were diabetic on the fasting value were not diabetic on the 2-h value, and 32% of those with diabetes on the 2-h value were not diabetic on the fasting value. Apart from obesity, there were no differences in cardiovascular risk between those identified by the fasting and the 2-h values. CONCLUSIONS: Changing the diagnostic criteria is likely to have variable and sometimes quite large effects on the prevalence of diabetes in different populations. Furthermore, the fasting criterion identifies different people as being diabetic than those identified by the 2-h criterion.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Diabetes Diabetes Care Clinical Diabetes Diabetes Spectrum
Copyright © 1999 by the American Diabetes Association.