4.7 Article

Association between visit-to-visit fasting glycemic variability and depression: a retrospective cohort study in a representative Korean population without diabetes

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 12, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-22302-0

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the association between glycemic variability and the incidence of depression in Koreans without diabetes. The results showed that greater visit-to-visit glycemic variability was associated with an increased risk of developing depression in people without diabetes, while maintaining steady fasting serum glucose levels may reduce the risk of incident depression.
Glycemic variability (GV) is a risk factor for depression in patients with diabetes. However, whether it is also a predictor of incident depression in people without diabetes remains unclear. We aimed to investigate the association between visit-to-visit variability in fasting serum glucose (FSG) levels and the incidence of depression among Koreans without diabetes. This retrospective cohort study included data of people without diabetes who did not have depression at baseline and had at least three FSG measurements (n = 264,480) extracted from the 2002-2007 Korean National Health Insurance Service-National Health Screening Cohort. GV was calculated as the average successive variability of FSG. Among 264,480 participants, 198,267 were observed during 2008-2013 and their hazard ratios (HR) of incident depression were calculated. Participants with the highest GV showed a higher risk of depression in fully adjusted models than those with the lowest GV (HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.02-1.16). The risk of incident depression heightened with increasing GV (p for trend < 0.001). Greater visit-to-visit GV may be associated with the risk of developing depression in people without diabetes. Conversely, maintaining steady FSG levels may reduce the risk of incident depression in people without diabetes.

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

4.7
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