Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 646

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Racial and ethnic differences in glycemic control of adults with type 2 diabetes.

Open access
Harris, M I, Eastman, R C, Cowie, C C, Flegal, K M, Eberhardt, M S·1999·Diabetes Care

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate glycemic control in a representative sample of U.S. adults with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey included national samples of non-Hispanic whites, non-Hispanic blacks, and Mexican Americans aged > or = 20 years. Information on medical history and treatment of diabetes was obtained to determine those who had been diagnosed with type 2 diabetes by a physician before the survey (n = 1,480). Fasting plasma glucose and HbA1c were measured, and the frequencies of sociodemographic and clinical variables related to glycemic control were determined. RESULTS: A higher proportion of non-Hispanic blacks were treated with insulin and a higher proportion of Mexican Americans were treated with oral agents compared with non-Hispanic whites, but the majority of adults in each racial or ethnic group (71-83%) used pharmacologic treatment for diabetes. Use of multiple daily insulin injections was more common in whites. Blood glucose self-monitoring was less common in Mexican Americans, but most patients had never self-monitored. HbA1c values in the nondiabetic range were found in 26% of non-Hispanic whites, 17% of non-Hispanic blacks, and 20% of Mexican Americans. Poor glycemic control (HbA1c > 8%) was more common in non-Hispanic black women (50%) and Mexican-American men (45%) compared with the other groups (35-38%), but HbA1c for both sexes and for all racial and ethnic groups was substantially higher than normal levels. Those with HbA1c > 8% included 52% of insulin-treated patients and 42% of those taking oral agents. There was no relationship of glycemic control to socioeconomic status or access to medical care in any racial or ethnic group. CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that many patients with type 2 diabetes in the U.S. have poor glycemic control, placing them at high risk of diabetic complications. Non-Hispanic black women, Mexican-American men, and patients treated with insulin and oral agents were disproportionately represented among those in poor glycemic control. Clinical, public health, and research efforts should focus on more effective methods to control blood glucose in patients with diabetes.

Overview

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/diacare.22.3.403

Cites

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cited by

See all 646

Metadata

Authors
Harris, M. I., Eastman, R. C., Cowie, C. C., Flegal, K. M., & Eberhardt, M. S.
Venue
Diabetes Care
Published
1999-03-01
Volume
22
Issue
3
Pages
403-408
ISSN
  • 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-5548
OpenAlex
W2161086857
Cited by
646
References
0
FWCI
14.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Racial and ethnic differences in glycemic control of adults with type 2 diabetes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2337/diacare.22.3.403
The paper
Harris, M. I., Eastman, R. C., Cowie, C. C., Flegal, K. M., & Eberhardt, M. S. (1999). Racial and ethnic differences in glycemic control of adults with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.22.3.403

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.