SynthesisBMC public health2025
Ethnic disparities in the prevalence of prediabetes and diabetes in Australia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEthnicity plays a significant role in the prevalence of prediabetes and diabetes, yet no systematic review has explored this in Australia.
objectiveThis study aims to systematically review and meta-analyse ethnic differences in the prevalence of diabetes and prediabetes in Australia.
methodIn July-August 2024, a comprehensive search of cross-sectional and observational studies published between 2010 and 2024 in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL, and Web of Science was conducted. Studies that reported the prevalence of diabetes and prediabetes in adults from various ethnic groups in Australia were included, while those focused on pregnant women and individuals under 18 were excluded. In STATA,'metaprop' and'metapreg' were used to estimate each indicator's prevalence and assess across different subgroups.
resultsOf 2,838 studies, 27 studies involving 1,137,925 participants were included. In 46.2% of studies, diabetes diagnoses were based on self-reported data. The pooled weighted prevalence was 21.8% (95% CI: 20.60-23.01) for diabetes and 13.7% (CI: 10.42-17.02) for prediabetes. Pacific people (36.5%, CI: 15.20-57.86) and Indigenous Australians (30.7%, CI: 23.90-37.49) had the highest pooled weighted prevalence of diabetes, while White/People of European descent (14.5%, CI: 13.03-16.01) and non-Indigenous Australians (18.6%, CI: 20.83-23.24) had the lowest prevalence of diabetes. There were significant heterogeneity (I
conclusionDiabetes and prediabetes are highly prevalent in Australia, with marked disparities across ethnic groups. Pacific people and Indigenous Australians had the the highest burden of both conditions, highlighting the need for targeted, culturally appropriate interventions. Future research exploring the underlying causes of these disparities and the effectiveness of tailored prevention strategies are warranted.
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.