ArticleBMC public health2026
An analysis and projection of diabetes prevalence in East England region.
Article in BMC public health, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDiabetes prevalence continues to rise in England, placing increasing pressure on primary and specialist healthcare services. This study examined how demographic, socioeconomic, and healthcare access factors influence Diabetes Mellitus register size across six Integrated Care Systems (ICSs) in the East of England and generated scenario based projections of future diabetes burden and specialist workforce requirements.
methodsA longitudinal panel design was applied using annual data (2012-2021) for six ICSs. Descriptive trend analysis summarised changes in diabetes registers, GP practice numbers, GP list size, deprivation (IMD scores), and population density. The association between these factors and Diabetes Mellitus register size was quantified using a fixed effects panel regression model, selected through F-tests, Breusch-Pagan LM tests, and Hausman specification testing. Future diabetes registers (2023-2027) were estimated using a regression based deterministic projection framework integrating: (i) model based forecasting, (ii) four scenario models based on plausible changes in population growth, deprivation, and GP capacity, and (iii) linear trend extrapolation of endocrinology consultant workforce numbers.
resultsDiabetes registers increased across all ICSs, with the region experiencing a 13% rise between 2012 and 2021. Regression findings showed that higher deprivation strongly predicted larger diabetes registers ([Formula: see text], [Formula: see text]), while increases in GP list size and GP practice numbers were also significant predictors. Under Scenario I, projected diabetes registers for 2023 ranged from 60,603 (Cambridgeshire and Peterborough) to 85,574 (Hertfordshire and West Essex). Scenario II, which incorporated greater increases in deprivation, produced larger projected registers across all ICSs, including 75,463 in Bedfordshire and 88,399 in Hertfordshire. Patient to consultant ratios were projected to increase in Bedfordshire and Mid and South Essex, suggesting potential specialist workforce shortages.
conclusionDemographic growth, rising deprivation, and pressures in primary care are key drivers of the increasing diabetes burden in the East of England. Projection results indicate that several ICSs may face widening gaps between patient demand and specialist capacity. Strengthening consultant staffing, directing resources toward more deprived areas, and supporting primary care resilience will be essential to maintain equitable diabetes care in future years.
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.