Cited by 32Health disparities and outcomesDiabetes Management and EducationAging, Health, and Disability

Socioeconomic status and race/ethnicity independently predict health decline among older diabetics

Open access
Nicklett, Emily J·2011·BMC Public Health

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There are pervasive racial and socioeconomic differences in health status among older adults with type 2 diabetes. The extent to which racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities unfold to differential health outcomes has yet to be investigated among older adults with diabetes. This study examines whether or not race/ethnicity and SES are independent predictors of steeper rates of decline in self-rated health among older adults in the U.S. with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: The study population was a subset of diabetic adults aged 65 and older from the Health and Retirement Study. Respondents were followed up to 16 years. Multilevel cumulative logit regression models were used to examine the contributions of socioeconomic indicators, race/ethnicity, and covariates over time. Health decline was measured as a change in self-reported health status over the follow-up period. RESULTS: Relative to whites, blacks had a significantly lower cumulative odds of better health status over time (OR: 0.61, p < .0001). Hispanics reported significantly lower cumulative odds better health over time relative to whites (OR: 0.59, p < .05). Although these disparities narrowed when socioeconomic characteristics were added to the model, significant differences remained. Including socioeconomic status did not remove the health effects of race/ethnicity among blacks and Hispanics. CONCLUSIONS: The author found that race/ethnicity and some socioeconomic indicators were independent predictors of health decline among older adults with diabetes.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/1471-2458-11-684

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Race was included not as a biological variable but as a structural equity proxy, reflecting disparities in healthcare access, treatment patterns, and social conditions that are associated with diabetes outcomes and health decline.

    “Race was included not as a biological variable but as a structural equity proxy, reflecting disparities in healthcare access, treatment patterns, and social conditions that are associated with diabetes outcomes and health decline [32,42].”

    From Machine learning-driven risk prediction for post-hospitalization diabetes case management: Integrating clinical and social determinants of health (2026) · cites this paper as [42]

    The Background (page unavailable) links racial and ethnic health disparities to differences in medical decision-making, quality and access to care, discrimination, and socioeconomic conditions. The Discussion (page unavailable) finds race/ethnicity predicts health decline among older adults with diabetes. The paper does not explicitly say race was included as a structural equity proxy rather than a biological variable, and its Conclusions describe the proposed mechanisms as needing further study. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 39 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. West BT Welch KB Galecki AT Linear mixed methods: A practical guide using statistical software 2007 Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nicklett, E. J.
Affiliations
University of Michigan (US)
Corresponding author
Nicklett, Emily J
Venue
BMC Public Health
Published
2011-09-02
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
684-684
ISSN
1471-2458 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2030432015
Cited by
32
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
FWCI
2.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Public Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Michigan
  • Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
  • College of Pharmacy, University of Michigan
  • National Institute on Aging
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Aging, Health, and Disability
Keywords
type 2 diabetes, older adults, socioeconomic status, race and ethnicity, health deterioration, self-rated health, racial disparities, Hispanic health, Black health, health disparities
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Black or African American, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Hispanic or Latino, Humans, Male, Social Class, United States, Black People, White People, Health Status Disparities, Diagnostic Self Evaluation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review