Skip to main content
. 2015 Aug;3(8):624–637. doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(15)00129-1

Table 4.

Univariate metaregression coefficients for sensitivity of HbA1c versus FPG in participants without diagnosed diabetes

Mean difference in sensitivity (percentage points; 95% CI) p value
Mean age (per 10 years older) −4·1 (−12·7 to 4·5) 0·3361
Percent male participants (per 10% more male) 4·6 (−9·0 to 18·2) 0·4901
Study midyear (per one more recent year) 1·2 (−0·9 to 3·2) 0·2566
Region .. 0·2097
High-income western countries Reference group ..
East, south, and southeast Asia 21·0 (−0·3 to 42·2) ..
Latin America and the Caribbean 8·5 (−17·9 to 34·9) ..
Sub-Saharan Africa 17·6 (−14·1 to 49·2) ..
Study representativeness .. 0·0915
National Reference group ..
Subnational 1·7 (−28·6 to 31·9) ..
Community 21·4 (2·1 to 40·8) ..
Prevalence of undiagnosed diabetes (percentage point higher undiagnosed diabetes) −0·7 (−4·0 to 2·6) 0·6780
Sample size (per 1000 participants without diagnosed diabetes) −1·6 (−4·6 to 1·4) 0·2730
Natural logarithm of per person gross domestic product −6·5 (−17·6 to 4·6) 0·2410
Mean haemoglobin (per g/L)* −2·0 (−4·1 to 0·2) 0·0677

We used a HbA1c definition of 6·5% or more and a FPG definition of 7·0 mmol/L or more. FPG=fasting plasma glucose.

*

Reliable mean haemoglobin data were available only for women of child-bearing age.82 The national mean for each country-year was used for both men and women; restricting the analysis to women led to similar results, with a mean difference of −2·1 (−4·5 to 0·3, p=0·0929).