Prevalence of Prediabetes and Undiagnosed Diabetes in Canada (2007–2011) According to Fasting Plasma Glucose and HbA1c Screening Criteria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To provide the first population-based estimates of prediabetes and undiagnosed type 2 diabetes prevalence in Canada. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We combined two fasting subsamples of the Canadian Health Measures Survey, which were restricted to nonpregnant adults ≥20 years of age (N = 3,494). Undiagnosed diabetes was defined as not having self-reported type 2 diabetes but having blood glucose measures that met Canadian guidelines (i.e., fasting plasma glucose [FPG] level of ≥7.0 mmol/L or hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] level of ≥6.5% [≥48 mmol/mol]). Prediabetes was defined as an FPG level of ≥6.1 and <7.0 mmol/L or an HbA1c level of ≥6.0% and <6.5% (≥42 and <48 mmol/mol). All estimates were weighted using survey sampling weights. CIs were calculated with the bootstrap method. RESULTS: According to FPG levels, the prevalence of undiagnosed type 2 diabetes in Canadian adults was 1.13% (95% CI 0.79, 1.62), contributing to ∼20% of total type 2 diabetes prevalence (5.62 [95% CI 4.52, 6.95]). Compared with FPG levels, the undiagnosed prevalence was greater using HbA1c level as a criterion (3.09% [95% CI 1.97, 4.81]), ∼41% of the total number of cases of diabetes (7.55 [95% CI 5.98, 9.49]). The HbA1c-only criterion resulted in a threefold increase in prediabetes prevalence overall and a sixfold increase among females (FPG 2.22%, HbA1c 13.31%). Screening based on FPG only identified older undiagnosed case patients, with a mean age of 58.7 years (95% CI 59.9, 63.4). Similarly, using HbA1c identified younger individuals with prediabetes, with reduced BMI and waist circumference compared with FPG levels. CONCLUSIONS: In this first study of a nationally representative sample with biospecimen measures, we found that the prevalence of undiagnosed type 2 diabetes and prediabetes was significantly higher using HbA1c levels compared with FPG levels. Further evaluation is needed to fully assess the impact of using the HbA1c criterion.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".