Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32661192›Full record

ArticleBMJ open diabetes research & care2020

Thirteen-year trends in the prevalence of diabetes according to socioeconomic condition and cardiovascular risk factors in a Swiss population.

Carlos de Mestral, Silvia Stringhini, Idris Guessous, François R Jornayvaz

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open diabetes research & care, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Carlos de MestralPopulation Epidemiology Unit, Division of Primary Care Medicine, Department of Primary Care Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-0237-882X
Silvia StringhiniPopulation Epidemiology Unit, Division of Primary Care Medicine, Department of Primary Care Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
Idris GuessousPopulation Epidemiology Unit, Division of Primary Care Medicine, Department of Primary Care Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland idris.guessous@hcuge.ch.
François R JornayvazUnit of Diabetology, Service of Endocrinology, Diabetology, Hypertension and Nutrition Services, Department of Medical Specialties, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
University Hospital of Geneva · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTo estimate the prevalence of and trends in diabetes according to sociodemographic indicators and cardiovascular risk factors in a Swiss population. RESEARCH DESIGN AND

methodsAnnual cross-sectional study of adults residing in the state of Geneva. We included 9886 participants (51% women; mean age (SD) of 48.9 (13.4) years). Diagnosed diabetes was self-reported; undiagnosed diabetes was defined as having fasting plasma glucose level of ≥7 mmol/L and no previous diagnosis; total diabetes as the sum of diagnosed and undiagnosed diabetes. To assess trends, we grouped survey years into three time periods: 2005-2010, 2011-2014, and 2015-2017. To assess inequalities, we constructed the relative index of inequality (RII) and the slope index of inequality (SII) for education, income, and health insurance subsidy (state program based on socioeconomic disadvantage).

resultsIn total, 683 diabetes cases were identified. In 2015-2017, total diabetes prevalence was 11.8% (8.6%-14.9%) among lowest income participants, and 4.7% (3.4%-5.9%) among highest income participants (p<0.01). Similar findings were observed for education. Among participants with full health insurance subsidy, diabetes prevalence was 19.4% (12.1%-26.8%), and 6.1% (5.3%-7.0%) among those without (p<0.01). High diabetes prevalence was observed among participants who were men, older, overweight or obese, hypertensive, and hypercholesterolemic. Among participants with diabetes, 74.0% (63.5%-84.4%) in the lowest income group were diagnosed, compared with 90.2% (81.9%-98.4%) in the highest income group (p=0.04). Over the 13-year period, widening relative and absolute inequalities in total diabetes prevalence were observed for education and income. The education-RII (95% CI) increased from 1.51 (95% CI 1.01 to 2.32) in 2005-2010 to 2.54 (95% CI 1.58 to 4.07) in 2015-2017 (p=0.01), and the education-SII (95% CI) from 0.04 (95% CI 0.01 to 0.08) to 0.08 (95% CI 0.04 to 0.10; p<0.01). The income-RII increased from 2.35 (95% CI 1.44 to 3.84) to 3.91 (95% CI 2.24 to 6.85; p<0.01), and the income-SII from 0.08 (95% CI 0.04 to 0.12) to 0.011 (95% CI 0.07 to 0.14; p=0.01). Inequalities by health insurance subsidy were large (RII 3.56 (95% CI 1.90 to 6.66) and SII 0.10 (95% CI 0.05 to 0.15)) but stable across the study period.

conclusionAmong adults living in Geneva, Switzerland, substantial differences were observed in diabetes prevalence across socioeconomic and cardiovascular risk groups over a 13-year period, and relative and absolute socioeconomic inequalities appeared to have increased.

Indexed as

Cardiovascular DiseasesDiabetes MellitusAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealth Status DisparitiesHeart Disease Risk FactorsHumansIncomeMaleMiddle AgedPrevalenceRisk FactorsSwitzerlandadult diabetessocial inequalities

Identifiers

PMID32661192
PMCPMC7359178
OpenAlexW3041725082

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.