Sociodemographic disparities in non‐diabetic hyperglycaemia and the transition to type 2 diabetes: evidence from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing
Open Access
- 12 June 2020
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Diabetic Medicine
- Vol. 37 (9), 1536-1544
- https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.14343
Abstract
Aim 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.Funding Information
- Health Services and Delivery Research Programme (16/48/07)
- National Institute on Aging (RO1AG7644)
- Economic and Social Research Council
This publication has 22 references indexed in Scilit:
- Self-Reported Prevalence of Diabetes Screening in the U.S., 2005–2010American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2014
- Prevalence of prediabetes in England from 2003 to 2011: population-based, cross-sectional studyBMJ Open, 2014
- Socioeconomic inequalities in the incidence and prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus in EuropeGaceta Sanitaria, 2013
- Contribution of modifiable risk factors to social inequalities in type 2 diabetes: prospective Whitehall II cohort studyBMJ, 2012
- Estimating the current and future costs of Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes in the UK, including direct health costs and indirect societal and productivity costsDiabetic Medicine, 2012
- Trends in the prevalence and incidence of diabetes in the UK: 1996-2005Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 2009
- Glucose Indices, Health Behaviors, and Incidence of Diabetes in AustraliaDiabetes Care, 2008
- Diabetes risk in British adults in mid life: a national prevalence study of glycated haemoglobinDiabetic Medicine, 2007
- Incidence of Type 2 diabetes in England and its association with baseline impaired fasting glucose: The Ely study 1990–2000Diabetic Medicine, 2007
- Prospective Study of Social and Other Risk Factors for Incidence of Type 2 Diabetes in the Whitehall II StudyArchives of Internal Medicine, 2004