BACKGROUND: Discrimination has been linked to negative health outcomes, but little research has investigated different types of discrimination to determine if some have a greater impact on outcomes. We examined the differential effect of discrimination based on race, level of education, gender, and language on glycemic control in adults with type 2 diabetes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Six hundred two patients with type 2 diabetes from two adult primary care clinics in the southeastern United States completed validated questionnaires. Questions included perceived discrimination because of race/ethnicity, level of education, sex/gender, or language. A multiple linear regression model assessed the differential effect of each type of perceived discrimination on glycemic control while adjusting for relevant covariates, including race, site, gender, marital status, duration of diabetes, number of years in school, number of hours worked per week, income, and health status. RESULTS: The mean age was 61.5 years, and the mean duration of diabetes was 12.3 years. Of the sample, 61.6% were men, and 64.9% were non-Hispanic black. In adjusted models, education discrimination remained significantly associated with glycemic control (β=0.47; 95% confidence interval, 0.03, 0.92). Race, gender and language discrimination were not significantly associated with poor glycemic control in either unadjusted or adjusted analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Discrimination based on education was found to be significantly associated with poor glycemic control. The findings suggest that education discrimination may be an important social determinant to consider when providing care to patients with type 2 diabetes and should be assessed separate from other types of discrimination, such as that based on race.
BACKGROUND: Discrimination has been linked to negative health outcomes, but little research has investigated different types of discrimination to determine if some have a greater impact on outcomes. We examined the differential effect of discrimination based on race, level of education, gender, and language on glycemic control in adults with type 2 diabetes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Six hundred two patients with type 2 diabetes from two adult primary care clinics in the southeastern United States completed validated questionnaires. Questions included perceived discrimination because of race/ethnicity, level of education, sex/gender, or language. A multiple linear regression model assessed the differential effect of each type of perceived discrimination on glycemic control while adjusting for relevant covariates, including race, site, gender, marital status, duration of diabetes, number of years in school, number of hours worked per week, income, and health status. RESULTS: The mean age was 61.5 years, and the mean duration of diabetes was 12.3 years. Of the sample, 61.6% were men, and 64.9% were non-Hispanic black. In adjusted models, education discrimination remained significantly associated with glycemic control (β=0.47; 95% confidence interval, 0.03, 0.92). Race, gender and language discrimination were not significantly associated with poor glycemic control in either unadjusted or adjusted analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Discrimination based on education was found to be significantly associated with poor glycemic control. The findings suggest that education discrimination may be an important social determinant to consider when providing care to patients with type 2 diabetes and should be assessed separate from other types of discrimination, such as that based on race.
Authors: Howard H Moffet; Nancy Adler; Dean Schillinger; Ameena T Ahmed; Barbara Laraia; Joe V Selby; Romain Neugebauer; Jennifer Y Liu; Melissa M Parker; Margaret Warton; Andrew J Karter Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2008-03-07 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Jewell H Halanych; Monika M Safford; James M Shikany; Yendelela Cuffee; Sharina D Person; Isabel C Scarinci; Catarina I Kiefe; Jeroan J Allison Journal: Ethn Dis Date: 2011 Impact factor: 1.847
Authors: Courtney R Lyles; Andrew J Karter; Bessie A Young; Clarence Spigner; David Grembowski; Dean Schillinger; Nancy E Adler Journal: J Health Care Poor Underserved Date: 2011-02
Authors: Rebekah J Walker; Brittany L Smalls; Jennifer A Campbell; Joni L Strom Williams; Leonard E Egede Journal: Endocrine Date: 2014-02-15 Impact factor: 3.633
Authors: Carol M Ashton; Paul Haidet; Debora A Paterniti; Tracie C Collins; Howard S Gordon; Kimberly O'Malley; Laura A Petersen; Barbara F Sharf; Maria E Suarez-Almazor; Nelda P Wray; Richard L Street Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Obinna Achuko; Rebekah J Walker; Jennifer A Campbell; Aprill Z Dawson; Leonard E Egede Journal: Diabetes Technol Ther Date: 2016-02-11 Impact factor: 6.118
Authors: May A Beydoun; Angedith Poggi-Burke; Alan B Zonderman; Ola S Rostant; Michele K Evans; Deidra C Crews Journal: Psychosom Med Date: 2017-09 Impact factor: 4.312
Authors: David M Cykert; Joni S Williams; Rebekah J Walker; Kimberly S Davis; Leonard E Egede Journal: J Diabetes Complications Date: 2016-09-30 Impact factor: 2.852
Authors: Aprill Z Dawson; Rebekah J Walker; Jennifer A Campbell; Leonard E Egede Journal: J Diabetes Complications Date: 2016-03-17 Impact factor: 2.852
Authors: Kevin M Pantalone; Anita D Misra-Hebert; Todd M Hobbs; Sheldon X Kong; Xinge Ji; Rahul Ganguly; Alex Milinovich; Wayne Weng; Janine M Bauman; Paul Petraro; Bartolome Burguera; Robert S Zimmerman; Michael W Kattan Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2020-06-11 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Gregory A Panza; Rebecca M Puhl; Beth A Taylor; Amanda L Zaleski; Jill Livingston; Linda S Pescatello Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-06-10 Impact factor: 3.240