Skip to content
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Menu
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Menu
Home
About Us
Resources
Profiles Metrics
Authors Directory
Institutions Directory
Top Authors
Top Institutions
Top Sponsors
AI Digest
Contact Us
Publication Details
AFRICAN RESEARCH NEXUS
SHINING A SPOTLIGHT ON AFRICAN RESEARCH
HbA1c of 6.5% to diagnose diabetes mellitus - does it work for us? - the bellville South Africa study
PLoS ONE, Volume 6, No. 8, Article e22558, Year 2011
Notification
URL copied to clipboard!
Description
Background: HbA1c has been the gold standard for glycaemic control follow-up for decades. In 2009, a level of 6.5% (48 mmol/mol) was proposed as diagnostic for diabetes. We test this cut-off in our community. Methods: Participants (946) from a community-based study were screened for diabetes using either a fasting blood glucose or oral glucose tolerance test (OFTT). The HbA1c cut-off of 6.5% was tested for each group. A receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve for both groups was generated to establish an optimal cut-off. Results: Our study included 224 (23.7%) males and 722 (76.3%) females. Using fasting blood glucose alone, 117 (14%) were diagnosed with diabetes -50% had an HbA1c value of ≥6.5% (48 mmol/mol). Using an OGTT, 147 (18%) were diagnosed with diabetes -46% had an HbA1c value of ≥6.5% (48 mmol/mol). ROC curves found a level of 6.1% (43 mmol/mol) to be optimal in both groups (AUC 0.85 and 0.82 respectively). The sensitivities were 80% and 75% and the specificities 77% and 78% respectively. Conclusions: A cut off of 6.5% (48 mmol/mol) is a good diagnostic tool with its high specificity; however the low sensitivity limits its use. We found a level of 6.1% (43 mmol/mol) to be optimal. This emphasizes the need for evidenced based values to be established in various population groups. © 2011 Zemlin et al.
Authors & Co-Authors
Zemlin, Annalise Edith
South Africa, Cape Town
Stellenbosch University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences
Matsha, Tandi Edith
South Africa, Bellville
Cape Peninsula University of Technology
Hassan, Mogamat Shafick
South Africa, Bellville
Cape Peninsula University of Technology
Erasmus, Rajiv Timothy
South Africa, Cape Town
Stellenbosch University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences
Statistics
Citations: 67
Authors: 4
Affiliations: 2
Identifiers
Doi:
10.1371/journal.pone.0022558
e-ISSN:
19326203
Research Areas
Health System And Policy
Noncommunicable Diseases
Study Design
Cross Sectional Study
Cohort Study
Study Locations
South Africa
Participants Gender
Female