ArticleBMC medicine2024
Sex disparities in the prevalence, incidence, and management of diabetes mellitus: an Australian retrospective primary healthcare study involving 668,891 individuals.
Article in BMC medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Impact of Health Insurance Coverage on Diabetes Care Quality: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Racial, Ethnic, and Gender Disparities in U.S. Adults with Type 2 Diabetes.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus and recommended low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and apolipoprotein B targets - a SwissDiab study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Using general practice data for chronic disease prevalence: the impact of record linkage on estimation accuracy.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025Article
- Long-term adherence to glucose-lowering medications in adults with diabetes: A data linkage study.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn Australia, diabetes is the fastest growing chronic condition, with prevalence trebling over the past three decades. Despite reported sex differences in diabetes outcomes, disparities in management and health targets remain unclear. This population-based retrospective study used MedicineInsight primary healthcare data to investigate sex differences in diabetes prevalence, incidence, management, and achievement of health targets.
methodsAdults (aged ≥ 18 years) attending 39 general practices in Western Australia were included. Diabetes incidence and prevalence were estimated by age category. Health targets assessed included body mass index (BMI), blood pressure, blood lipids, and glycated haemoglobin (HbA
resultsRecords of 668,891 individuals (53.4% women) were analysed. Diabetes prevalence ranged from 1.3% (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2%-1.3%) in those aged < 50 years to 7.2% (95% CI 7.1%-7.3%) in those aged ≥ 50 years and was overall higher in men. In patients younger than 30 years, incidence was higher in women, with this reversing after the age of 50. Among patients with diabetes, BMI ≥ 35 kg/m
conclusionsThis research underscores variations in diabetes epidemiology and management based on sex. Tailoring diabetes management should consider the patient's sex.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.