4.3 Article

Measures of general and central obesity and risk of type 2 diabetes in a Ghanaian population

期刊

TROPICAL MEDICINE & INTERNATIONAL HEALTH
卷 18, 期 2, 页码 141-151

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/tmi.12024

关键词

obesity; type 2 diabetes; sub-Saharan Africa; ROC curves

资金

  1. Charite Universitatsmedizin Berlin [89539150]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective The epidemic of obesity and type 2 diabetes is evident in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). However, their associations have hardly been examined in this region. Methods A hospital-based casecontrol study in urban Ghana consisting of 1221 adults (542 cases and 679 controls) investigated the role of anthropometric parameters for diabetes. Logistic regression was used for analysis. The discriminative power and population-specific cut-off points for diabetes were identified by receiver operating characteristic curves. Results The strongest association with diabetes was observed for waist-to-hip ratio: age-adjusted odds ratios per 1 standard deviation difference were 1.95 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.642.31) in women and 1.40 [1.011.94] in men. Also, among women, the odds of diabetes increased with higher waist circumference (1.35 [1.171.57]) and waist-to-height ratio (1.29 [1.121.50]). Among men, this was not discernible. Rather, hip circumference was inversely related (0.69 [0.500.95]). Body mass index was neither associated with diabetes in women (1.01 [0.881.15]) nor in men (0.74 [0.521.04]). Among both genders, waist-to-hip ratio showed the best discriminative ability for diabetes in this population and the optimal cut-off points were =0.88 in women and =0.90 in men. Recommended cut-off points for body mass index and waist circumference had a poor predictive ability. Conclusion Our findings suggest that measures of central rather than general obesity relate to type 2 diabetes in SSA. It remains to be verified from larger population-based epidemiological studies whether anthropometric targets of obesity prevention in SSA differ from those in developed countries.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据