Cited by 183Diabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsDiabetes Treatment and Management

Comparison of A1C and Fasting Glucose Criteria to Diagnose Diabetes Among U.S. Adults

Open access
Carson, April P., Reynolds, Kristi, Fonseca, Vivian A., Muntner, Paul·2010·Diabetes Care

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare A1C and fasting glucose for the diagnosis of diabetes among U.S. adults. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This study included 6,890 adults (≥20 years of age) from the 1999–2006 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey without a self-reported history of diabetes who had fasted ≥9 h. A1C ≥6.5% and fasting glucose ≥126 mg/dl were used, separately, to define diabetes. RESULTS: Overall, 1.8% of U.S. adults had A1C ≥6.5% and fasting glucose ≥126 mg/dl, 0.5% had A1C ≥6.5% and fasting glucose <126 mg/dl, and 1.8% had A1C <6.5% and fasting glucose ≥126 mg/dl. Compared with individuals with A1C <6.5% and fasting glucose ≥126 mg/dl, individuals with A1C ≥6.5% and fasting glucose <126 mg/dl were younger, more likely to be non-Hispanic black, had lower Hb levels, and had higher C-reactive protein. CONCLUSIONS: A1C ≥6.5% demonstrates reasonable agreement with fasting glucose for diagnosing diabetes among U.S. adults.

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 · 10.2337/dc09-1227

Cites

2 of 2 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?

  • The IEC A1C criteria have recently been compared with testing with fasting glucose or OGTTs in various populations to diagnose diabetes and high-risk/pre-diabetes.

    “The IEC A1C criteria have recently been compared with testing with fasting glucose or oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs) in various populations to diagnose diabetes (7–13) and high-risk/pre-diabetes (10,11,13), but the ADA A1C criteria have not been studied.”

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

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. [1]International Expert Committee. International Expert Committee report on the role of the A1C assay in the diagnosis of diabetes. Diabetes Care 2009; 32: 1327– 1334 19502545 PMC2699715
  2. [2]Consensus Committee. Consensus statement on the worldwide standardization of the hemoglobin A1C measurement: the American Diabetes Association, European Association for the Study of Diabetes, International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, and the International Diabetes Federation. Diabetes Care 2007; 30: 2399– 2400 17726190
  3. [3]Little RR: Glycated hemoglobin standardization: National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program (NGSP) perspective. Clin Chem Lab Med 2003; 41: 1191– 1198 14598869
  4. [6]Ford ES Li C Little RR Mokdad AH: Trends in A1C concentrations among U.S. adults with diagnosed diabetes from 1999 to 2004. Diabetes Care 2008; 31: 102– 104 17934146
  5. [8]Selvin E Zhu H Brancati FL: Elevated A1C in adults without a history of diabetes in the U.S. Diabetes Care 2009; 32: 828– 833 19196895 PMC2671106

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Carson, A. P., Reynolds, K., Fonseca, V. A., & Muntner, P.
Affiliations
  • University of Alabama at Birmingham (US)
  • Kaiser Permanente (US)
  • Texas A&M Health Science Center (US)
Corresponding author
Carson, April P.
Venue
Diabetes Care
Published
2009-10-06
Volume
33
Issue
1
Pages
95-97
ISSN
  • 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-5548
OpenAlex
W2109864539
Cited by
183
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 17
FWCI
15.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Diabetes Care (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
Keywords
diabetes diagnosis, HbA1c, fasting blood glucose, diagnostic criteria, diagnostic agreement, NHANES, C-reactive protein, hemoglobin levels, non-Hispanic Black adults
MeSH terms
Adult, Blood Glucose, Diabetes Mellitus, Female, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Sensitivity and Specificity, United States

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