. 2011 Mar 15;1(1):e000062. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2011-000062

Table 2.

Two logistic regression analyses with the outcome filaggrin null mutation status and diabetes, respectively, and adjusted for variables shown in the table as well as age

Explanatory variables	General population, patients with type 1 and 2 diabetes (n=4213)
	Filaggrin null mutation
	Percentage (n/n_total)	Adjusted OR^* with 95% CI
Sex
Men	7.8 (159/2029)	1 (reference)
Women	8.8 (193/2184)	1.18 (0.94 to 1.47)
Group
Non-diabetic	7.8 (246/3136)	1 (reference)
Screen-detected diabetes	9.1 (6/66)	1.23 (0.52 to 2.88)
Self-reported diabetes	12.8 (17/133)	1.78 (1.05 to 3.04)^‡, p=0.032
Type 1 diabetes	6.7 (7/104)	0.86 (0.39 to 1.87)
Type 2 diabetes	9.8 (76/774)	1.37 (1.003 to 1.89)^‡, p=0.048

	General population and patients with type 2 diabetes (n=4109)
Explanatory variables	Diabetes^†
Explanatory variables	Percentage (n/n_total)	Adjusted OR^* with 95% CI
Sex
Men	29.8 (586/1967)	1 (reference)
Women	18.1 (387/2142)	0.56 (0.46 to 0.67)^‡, p=0.001
Filaggrin
Wild type	23.2 (874/3764)	1 (reference)
Null mutation	28.2 (99/345)	1.50 (1.10 to 2.06)^‡, p=0.011
BMI (kg/m²)
<25	9.7 (167/1713)	1 (reference)
25–30	23.2 (341/1469)	1.97 (1.56 to 2.47)^‡, p=0.001
>30	49.1 (461/905)	7.36 (5.79 to 9.36)^‡, p=0.001

Non-diabetic, healthy controls from the general population in Copenhagen; Screen-detected diabetes, diabetes screening group defined as subjects who did not report diabetes but who had a fasting blood glucose ≥7 and/or glycated haemoglobin ≥6.5%. Self-reported diabetes, diabetes group defined as subjects who gave an affirmative answer to the question: ‘Have you ever been told that you suffered from diabetes?’

Mutually adjusted for variables shown in the table and age.

^†

Diabetes was defined as belonging to the ‘screen-detected diabetes group,’ the ‘self-reported diabetes group,’ or the ‘type 2 diabetes group.’ The ‘type 1 diabetes groups’ was regarded as missing data.

^‡

Statistically significant.