Table 1.
Anthropometric and socio-economic data of the patients and control subjects
| Body mass index | Abdominal circumference (Cm) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age group (years) | Sex | Patients | Control | Patients | Control | ||||
| LIG/MIG | HIG | LIG/MIG | HIG | LIG/MIG | HIG | LIG/MIG | HIG | ||
| 31–40 | Male | 27.48 ± 2.98 (n = 2) | Nil | 24.16 ± 3.13 (n = 5) | Nil | 98 ± 5.29 (n = 2) | Nil | 88.2 ± 5.45 (n = 5) | Nil |
| Female | Nil | Nil | 25.32 ± 3.05 (n = 3) | Nil | Nil | Nil | 80.67 ± 6.55 (n = 3) | Nil | |
| 41–50 | Male | 25.24 ± 4.33 (n = 8) | 29.64 ± 3.55 (n = 3) | 23.42 ± 2.96 (n = 6) | 24.07 ± 2.31 (n = 2) | 95.62 ± 8.07 (n = 8) | 100 ± 5.99 (n = 3) | 85.5 ± 5.88 (n = 6) | 90 ± 2.83 (n = 2) |
| Female | 22.55 ± 4.39 (n = 2) | Nil | 22.04 ± 4.97 (n = 2) | Nil | 83 ± 8.88 (n = 2) | Nil | 81.5 ± 6.68 (n = 2) | Nil | |
| 51–60 | Male | 27.38 ± 4.25 (n = 8) | 23.48 ± 4.29 (n = 2) | 25.53 ± 3.04 (n = 3) | 26.67 ± 3.07 (n = 2) | 96.5 ± 6.79 (n = 8) | 97 ± 8.81 (n = 2) | 89.33 ± 6.03 (n = 3) | 90 ± 6.03 (n = 2) |
| Female | 25.35 ± 4.42 (n = 6) | 32.51 ± 0 (n = 1) | Nil | Nil | 96.17 ± 7.99 (n = 6) | 102 ± 0 (n = 1) | Nil | Nil | |
| >60 | Male | 25.32 ± 4.21 (n = 6) | 26.48 ± 4.78 (n = 5) | 31.39 ± 3.58 (n = 2) | Nil | 91.17 ± 7.99 (n = 6) | 94.85 ± 10.5 (n = 5) | 89 ± 5.98 (n = 2) | Nil |
| Female | 30.24 ± 4.38 (n = 3) | Nil | Nil | Nil | 102 ± 9.23 (n = 3) | Nil | Nil | Nil | |
All values are mean ± SD. n Number of subjects; LIG/MIG low income/middle income group; HIG high income group
Since there is no clear demarcation of urban/rural area in Kerala, there is no relevance in classifying the subjects on this basis