Dataset Information

A retrospective epidemiological study of type 1 diabetes mellitus in wales, UK between 2008 and 2018.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Studies of prevalence and the demographic profile of type 1 diabetes are challenging because of the relative rarity of the condition, however, these outcomes can be determined using routine healthcare data repositories. Understanding the epidemiology of type 1 diabetes allows for targeted interventions and care of this life-affecting condition.

Objectives

To describe the prevalence, incidence and demographics of persons with type 1 diabetes diagnosed in Wales, UK, using the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) Databank.

Methods

Data derived from primary and secondary care throughout Wales available in the SAIL Databank were used to identify people with type 1 diabetes to determine the prevalence and incidence of type 1 diabetes over a 10 year period (2008-18) and describe the demographic and clinical characteristics of this population by age, socioeconomic deprivation and settlement type. The seasonal variation in incidence rates was also examined.

Results

The prevalence of type 1 diabetes in 2018 was 0.32% in the whole population, being greater in men compared to women (0.35% vs 0.28% respectively); highest in those aged 15-29 years (0.52%) and living in the most socioeconomically deprived areas (0.38%). The incidence of type 1 diabetes over 10 years was 14.0 cases/100,000 people/year for the whole population of Wales. It was highest in children aged 0-14 years (33.6 cases/100,000 people/year) and areas of high socioeconomic deprivation (16.8 cases/100,000 people/year) and least in those aged 45-60 years (6.5 cases/100,000 people/year) and in areas of low socioeconomic deprivation (11.63 cases/100,000 people/year). A seasonal trend in the diagnoses of type 1 diabetes was observed with higher incidence in winter months.

Conclusion

This nation-wide retrospective epidemiological study using routine data revealed that the incidence of type 1 diabetes in Wales was greatest in those aged 0-14 years with a higher incidence and prevalence in the most deprived areas. These findings illustrate the need for health-related policies targeted at high deprivation areas to include type 1 diabetes in their remit.

SUBMITTER: Rafferty J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8103995 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: We sought to investigate the methodological and reporting quality of published systematic reviews describing randomized controlled trials in type 2 diabetes mellitus and analyze their association with status of protocol registration. Methods: We searched the PubMed database and identified non-Cochrane systematic reviews, with or without meta-analysis, reporting on type 2 diabetes mellitus and published between 2005 and 2018. We then randomly selected 20% of these reviews in each year, and performed methodological and reporting quality assessment using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Review 2 (AMSTAR-2) checklist and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. We also conducted regression analyses to explore the association between characteristics of systematic reviews and AMSTAR-2 or PRISMA scores. Results: A total of 238 systematic reviews, including 33 registered and 205 non-registered articles, met the inclusion criteria and were subsequently reviewed. Analysis indicated an increase in both registered rates and quality of systematic reviews in type 2 diabetes mellitus over the recent years. With regards to methodological and reporting quality, we found higher scores in registered, relative to non-registered reviews (AMSTAR-2 mean score: 18.0 vs. 14.5, P = 0.000; PRISMA mean score: 20.4 vs. 17.6, P = 0.000). AMSTAR-2 and PRISMA scores were associated with registration status, country of the first author, and statistical results, whereas the proportion of discussing publication bias and reporting funding sources were <40% for both registered and non-registered systematic reviews. Conclusions: Methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews in type 2 diabetes mellitus indicates an improvement in the recent years. However, the overall quality remains low, necessitating further improvement. Future studies are expected to pay more attention to prospective registration, description of publication bias and reporting of funding sources.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine whether there is a link between hypoglycaemia and mortality among participants in the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial.DesignRetrospective epidemiological analysis of data from the ACCORD trial. Setting Diabetes clinics, research clinics, and primary care clinics.ParticipantsPatients were eligible for the ACCORD study if they had type 2 diabetes, a glycated haemoglobin (haemoglobin A(1C)) concentration of 7.5% or more during screening, and were aged 40-79 years with established cardiovascular disease or 55-79 years with evidence of subclinical disease or two additional cardiovascular risk factors. Intervention Intensive (haemoglobin A(1C) <6.0%) or standard (haemoglobin A(1C) 7.0-7.9%) glucose control.Outcome measuresSymptomatic, severe hypoglycaemia, manifest as either blood glucose concentration of less than 2.8 mmol/l (<50 mg/dl) or symptoms that resolved with treatment and that required either the assistance of another person or medical assistance, and all cause and cause specific mortality, including a specific assessment for involvement of hypoglycaemia.Results10 194 of the 10 251 participants enrolled in the ACCORD study who had at least one assessment for hypoglycaemia during regular follow-up for vital status were included in this analysis. Unadjusted annual mortality among patients in the intensive glucose control arm was 2.8% in those who had one or more episodes of hypoglycaemia requiring any assistance compared with 1.2% for those with no episodes (53 deaths per 1924 person years and 201 deaths per 16 315 person years, respectively; adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.41, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.93). A similar pattern was seen among participants in the standard glucose control arm (3.7% (21 deaths per 564 person years) v 1.0% (176 deaths per 17 297 person years); adjusted HR 2.30, 95% CI 1.46 to 3.65). On the other hand, among participants with at least one hypoglycaemic episode requiring any assistance, a non-significantly lower risk of death was seen in those in the intensive arm compared with those in the standard arm (adjusted HR 0.74, 95% 0.46 to 1.23). A significantly lower risk was observed in the intensive arm compared with the standard arm in participants who had experienced at least one hypoglycaemic episode requiring medical assistance (adjusted HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.99). Of the 451 deaths that occurred in ACCORD up to the time when the intensive treatment arm was closed, one death was adjudicated as definitely related to hypoglycaemia.ConclusionSymptomatic, severe hypoglycaemia was associated with an increased risk of death within each study arm. However, among participants who experienced at least one episode of hypoglycaemia, the risk of death was lower in such participants in the intensive arm than in the standard arm. Symptomatic, severe hypoglycaemia does not appear to account for the difference in mortality between the two study arms up to the time when the ACCORD intensive glycaemia arm was discontinued.Trial registrationNCT00000620.