Table 2.

Association between symptomatic hypoglycaemia and WHO-5, HFS-w and DSC-r

	Unadjusted model			Adjusted modela
	Beta	P value	95%-CI	Beta	P value	95%-CI
WHO-5
0–1b	0.33	0.565	−0.79 to 1.44	−0.27	0.673	−1.53 to 0.99
1–2c	−0.75	0.260	−2.05 to 0.55	−0.52	0.499	−2.02 to 0.99
0–2d	−0.42	0.523	−1.72 to 0.87	−0.79	0.302	−2.29 to 0.71

	Ratio of geometric averagese	P value	95%-CI	Ratio of geometric averagese	P value	95% CI
HFS-w
0–1b	1.16	<0.001	1.08 to 1.24	1.24	<0.001	1.15 to 1.35
1–2c	1.04	0.321	0.96 to 1.13	1.07	0.174	0.97 to 1.17
0–2d	1.21	<0.001	1.11 to 1.31	1.33	<0.001	1.20 to 1.47
DSC-r
0–1b	1.01	0.721	0.96 to 1.06	1.04	0.240	0.98 to 1.10
1–2c	1.08	0.004	1.03 to 1.14	1.10	0.004	1.03 to 1.17
0–2d	1.09	0.002	1.03 to 1.16	1.14	<0.001	1.06 to 1.22

Hypoglycaemia was self-reported as number of episodes during 3 months prior to visit. WHO-5 was self-reported as emotional well-being experienced during 2 weeks prior to visit; HFS-w as hypoglycaemia fear during 3 months prior to visit; DSC-r as diabetes symptom distress during month prior to visit

^aAdjusted for age, diabetes duration, HbA1c, body mass index, level of education, the number of complications and gender

^bComparison between group 0 (no hypoglycaemia) and group 1 (1 hypoglycaemic episode) regarding severe hypoglycaemia

^cComparison between group 1 (1 hypoglycaemic episode) and group 2 (2 hypoglycaemic episodes) regarding severe hypoglycaemia

^dComparison between group 0 (no hypoglycaemia) and group 2 (2 hypoglycaemic episodes) regarding severe hypoglycaemia

^eHFS-w and DSC-r scores were analysed as log transformed and back transformed with a ratio of geometric averages as a result. This can be interpreted as follows: “the geometric average of the reference group … times greater compared to the geometric average of the compared group”