Cited by 77Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsDiabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes Treatment and Management

Macrovascular Risk and Diagnostic Criteria for Type 2 Diabetes

Open access
Jesudason, David R., Dunstan, Kerrie, Leong, Darryl, Wittert, Gary A.·2003·Diabetes Care

Abstract

OBJECTIVE—The use of fasting plasma glucose (FPG) level ≥7.0 mmol/l leads to underdiagnosis of type 2 diabetes compared with the oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT). The OGTT is of limited use for population screening. Most of the increase in cardiovascular risk in relation to increasing blood glucose occurs before the threshold at which the diagnosis of type 2 diabetes is made. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of HbA1c and FPG as predictors of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular risk and, accordingly, to develop a rational approach to screening for abnormalities of glucose tolerance. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—OGTT and measurement of HbA1c and FPG levels were performed in 505 subjects screened for type 2 diabetes. Anthropomorphic measurements were obtained. A cardiovascular risk factor questionnaire was completed. RESULTS—The subjects were aged 19–88 years (mean 53.8). The incidence of type 2 diabetes was 10.4% based on the OGTT and 4% based on an FPG level ≥7.0 mmol/l. Using high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), HbA1c of <4.7 and ≥6.2% predicted with certainty the absence or presence of type 2 diabetes as defined by the OGTT. The corresponding cutoffs were <5.0 and ≥6.8% for HbA1c (DCA2000 HPLC device; Bayer Diagnostics, Mulgrave, Australia) and <4.7 and ≥6.4 mmol/l for FPG. However, 75–85% of subjects in each case had intermediate values, which were therefore nondiagnostic. Cardiovascular risk increased at least 2.2 times at an HbA1c level ≥6.2% (by HPLC), 1.8–2.2 times at an HbA1c level of 5.6–6.1% (by HPLC), 2 times at an FPG level ≥6.4 mmol/l, and 1.7–1.9 times at an FPG level of 5.6–6.3 mmol/l. CONCLUSIONS—Measurement of FPG and HbA1c levels will diagnose or exclude type 2 diabetes with certainty in a minority (15%) of people. There is a continuous relationship between FPG and HbA1c and cardiovascular risk. Accordingly, we propose that there is a rational basis for using either FPG and HbA1c for purposes of screening and assigning risk. Individuals with an HbA1c level of 5.6–6.1% and an FPG level of 5.6–6.3 mmol/l are at greatest risk for cardiovascular disease and should be targeted for further evaluation. An algorithm outlining a cost-effective approach is presented.

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.26.2.485

Cites

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

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 33 · Cited by 77

Authors
Jesudason, D. R., Dunstan, K., Leong, D., & Wittert, G. A.
Affiliations
Royal Adelaide Hospital (AU)
Venue
Diabetes Care
Published
2003-02-01
Volume
26
Issue
2
Pages
485-490
ISSN
  • 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-5548
OpenAlex
W2036053752
Cited by
77
References
33
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 6
FWCI
3.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Diabetes Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Royal Adelaide Hospital
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
Keywords
type 2 diabetes, HbA1c, fasting blood glucose, oral glucose tolerance test, diabetes screening, cardiovascular risk, diagnostic criteria, underdiagnosis, mass screening
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Blood Glucose, Cardiovascular Diseases, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Fasting, Glucose Tolerance Test, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Middle Aged, Risk Factors, Reproducibility of Results, Risk Assessment

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