Laura Dwyer-Lindgren1, Johan P Mackenbach2, Frank J van Lenthe2, Abraham D Flaxman3, Ali H Mokdad3. 1. Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA ladwyer@uw.edu. 2. Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, University Medical Centre Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. 3. Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Previous analyses of diabetes prevalence in the U.S. have considered either only large geographic regions or only individuals in whom diabetes had been diagnosed. We estimated county-level trends in the prevalence of diagnosed, undiagnosed, and total diabetes as well as rates of diagnosis and effective treatment from 1999 to 2012. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We used a two-stage modeling procedure. In the first stage, self-reported and biomarker data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) were used to build models for predicting true diabetes status, which were applied to impute true diabetes status for respondents in the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS). In the second stage, small area models were fit to imputed BRFSS data to derive county-level estimates of diagnosed, undiagnosed, and total diabetes prevalence, as well as rates of diabetes diagnosis and effective treatment. RESULTS: In 2012, total diabetes prevalence ranged from 8.8% to 26.4% among counties, whereas the proportion of the total number of cases that had been diagnosed ranged from 59.1% to 79.8%, and the proportion of successfully treated individuals ranged from 19.4% to 31.0%. Total diabetes prevalence increased in all counties between 1999 and 2012; however, the rate of increase varied widely. Over the same period, rates of diagnosis increased in all counties, while rates of effective treatment stagnated. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate substantial disparities in diabetes prevalence, rates of diagnosis, and rates of effective treatment within the U.S. These findings should be used to target high-burden areas and select the right mix of public health strategies.
OBJECTIVE: Previous analyses of diabetes prevalence in the U.S. have considered either only large geographic regions or only individuals in whom diabetes had been diagnosed. We estimated county-level trends in the prevalence of diagnosed, undiagnosed, and total diabetes as well as rates of diagnosis and effective treatment from 1999 to 2012. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We used a two-stage modeling procedure. In the first stage, self-reported and biomarker data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) were used to build models for predicting true diabetes status, which were applied to impute true diabetes status for respondents in the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS). In the second stage, small area models were fit to imputed BRFSS data to derive county-level estimates of diagnosed, undiagnosed, and total diabetes prevalence, as well as rates of diabetes diagnosis and effective treatment. RESULTS: In 2012, total diabetes prevalence ranged from 8.8% to 26.4% among counties, whereas the proportion of the total number of cases that had been diagnosed ranged from 59.1% to 79.8%, and the proportion of successfully treated individuals ranged from 19.4% to 31.0%. Total diabetes prevalence increased in all counties between 1999 and 2012; however, the rate of increase varied widely. Over the same period, rates of diagnosis increased in all counties, while rates of effective treatment stagnated. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate substantial disparities in diabetes prevalence, rates of diagnosis, and rates of effective treatment within the U.S. These findings should be used to target high-burden areas and select the right mix of public health strategies.
Authors: Ali H Mokdad; Katherine Ballestros; Michelle Echko; Scott Glenn; Helen E Olsen; Erin Mullany; Alex Lee; Abdur Rahman Khan; Alireza Ahmadi; Alize J Ferrari; Amir Kasaeian; Andrea Werdecker; Austin Carter; Ben Zipkin; Benn Sartorius; Berrin Serdar; Bryan L Sykes; Chris Troeger; Christina Fitzmaurice; Colin D Rehm; Damian Santomauro; Daniel Kim; Danny Colombara; David C Schwebel; Derrick Tsoi; Dhaval Kolte; Elaine Nsoesie; Emma Nichols; Eyal Oren; Fiona J Charlson; George C Patton; Gregory A Roth; H Dean Hosgood; Harvey A Whiteford; Hmwe Kyu; Holly E Erskine; Hsiang Huang; Ira Martopullo; Jasvinder A Singh; Jean B Nachega; Juan R Sanabria; Kaja Abbas; Kanyin Ong; Karen Tabb; Kristopher J Krohn; Leslie Cornaby; Louisa Degenhardt; Mark Moses; Maryam Farvid; Max Griswold; Michael Criqui; Michelle Bell; Minh Nguyen; Mitch Wallin; Mojde Mirarefin; Mostafa Qorbani; Mustafa Younis; Nancy Fullman; Patrick Liu; Paul Briant; Philimon Gona; Rasmus Havmoller; Ricky Leung; Ruth Kimokoti; Shahrzad Bazargan-Hejazi; Simon I Hay; Simon Yadgir; Stan Biryukov; Stein Emil Vollset; Tahiya Alam; Tahvi Frank; Talha Farid; Ted Miller; Theo Vos; Till Bärnighausen; Tsegaye Telwelde Gebrehiwot; Yuichiro Yano; Ziyad Al-Aly; Alem Mehari; Alexis Handal; Amit Kandel; Ben Anderson; Brian Biroscak; Dariush Mozaffarian; E Ray Dorsey; Eric L Ding; Eun-Kee Park; Gregory Wagner; Guoqing Hu; Honglei Chen; Jacob E Sunshine; Jagdish Khubchandani; Janet Leasher; Janni Leung; Joshua Salomon; Jurgen Unutzer; Leah Cahill; Leslie Cooper; Masako Horino; Michael Brauer; Nicholas Breitborde; Peter Hotez; Roman Topor-Madry; Samir Soneji; Saverio Stranges; Spencer James; Stephen Amrock; Sudha Jayaraman; Tejas Patel; Tomi Akinyemiju; Vegard Skirbekk; Yohannes Kinfu; Zulfiqar Bhutta; Jost B Jonas; Christopher J L Murray Journal: JAMA Date: 2018-04-10 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Chirag J Jivanji; Varsha M Asrani; Sayali A Pendharkar; Melody G Bevan; Nicola A Gillies; Danielle H E Soo; Ruma G Singh; Maxim S Petrov Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2017-03-14 Impact factor: 3.199
Authors: Driton Vela; Jovica Leshoski; Elizabeta S Gjorgievska; Nikola Hadzi-Petrushev; Muharrem Jakupaj; Ramadan B Sopi; Mitko Mladenov Journal: Oman Med J Date: 2017-05
Authors: Charbel El Bcheraoui; Ali H Mokdad; Laura Dwyer-Lindgren; Amelia Bertozzi-Villa; Rebecca W Stubbs; Chloe Morozoff; Shreya Shirude; Mohsen Naghavi; Christopher J L Murray Journal: JAMA Date: 2018-03-27 Impact factor: 56.272