Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorChatzi, G
dc.contributor.authorMason, T
dc.contributor.authorChandola, T
dc.contributor.authorWhittaker, W
dc.contributor.authorHowarth, E
dc.contributor.authorCotterill, S
dc.contributor.authorRavindrarajah, R
dc.contributor.authorMcManus, E
dc.contributor.authorSutton, M
dc.contributor.authorBower, P
dc.date.accessioned2020-11-27T00:22:46Z
dc.date.available2020-11-27T00:22:46Z
dc.date.issued2020-09-01
dc.identifier.citationChatzi, G., Mason, T., Chandola, T., Whittaker, W., Howarth, E., Cotterill, S., Ravindrarajah, R., McManus, E., Sutton, M. & Bower, P. (2020). Sociodemographic disparities in non-diabetic hyperglycaemia and the transition to type 2 diabetes: evidence from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. Diabetic Medicine, 37 (9), pp.1536-1544. https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.14343.
dc.identifier.issn0742-3071
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11343/252442
dc.description.abstractAim To explore whether there are social inequalities in non‐diabetic hyperglycaemia (NDH) and in transitions to type 2 diabetes mellitus and NDH low‐risk status in England. Methods Some 9143 men and women aged over 50 years were analysed from waves 2, 4, 6 and 8 (2004–2016) of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA). Participants were categorized as: NDH ‘low‐risk’ [HbA1c < 42 mmol/mol (< 6.0%)], NDH [HbA1c 42–47 mmol/mol (6.0–6.4%)] and type 2 diabetes [HbA1c > 47 mmol/mol (> 6.4%)]. Logistic regression models estimated the association between sociodemographic characteristics and NDH, and the transitions from NDH to diagnosed or undiagnosed type 2 diabetes and low‐risk status in future waves. Results NDH was more prevalent in older participants, those reporting a disability, those living in deprived areas and in more disadvantaged social classes. Older participants with NDH were less likely to progress to undiagnosed type 2 diabetes [odds ratio (OR) 0.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.08, 0.96]. NDH individuals with limiting long‐standing illness (OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.16, 2.53), who were economically inactive (OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.02, 2.51) or from disadvantaged social classes (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.02, 2.61) were more likely to progress to type 2 diabetes. Socially disadvantaged individuals were less likely (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.41, 0.98) to progress to NDH low‐risk status. Conclusions There were socio‐economic differences in NDH prevalence, transition to type 2 diabetes and transition to NDH low‐risk status. Disparities in transitions included the greater likelihood of disadvantaged social groups with NDH developing type 2 diabetes and greater likelihood of advantaged social groups with NDH becoming low‐risk. These socio‐economic differences should be taken into account when targeting prevention initiatives.
dc.languageEnglish
dc.publisherWiley
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
dc.titleSociodemographic disparities in non-diabetic hyperglycaemia and the transition to type 2 diabetes: evidence from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/dme.14343
melbourne.affiliation.departmentMelbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research
melbourne.source.titleDiabetic Medicine
melbourne.source.volume37
melbourne.source.issue9
melbourne.source.pages1536-1544
dc.rights.licensecc-by
melbourne.elementsid1453306
melbourne.contributor.authorSutton, Matthew
dc.identifier.eissn1464-5491
melbourne.accessrightsOpen Access


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record