Rathmann Level III-2 Low risk of Patients who formed Included patients without diabetes 5.7%≥ ≥6.5% IFG: FPG 3x3 table, () bias. part of a aged 61–75 years. Excluded patients 6.1 mmol/L≥ ≥7.0 ROC Elderly subgroup HbA1c cohort study: with acute illness who could not FPG analysis Augsburg, of participants No <6.5% subjects who were undergo OGT testing, and people <7.0 mmol/L; Germany recruited as part applicability 2hPG aged 61–75 years whose data was incomplete. 2hPG of concerns. ≥7.8 without pre-existing <7.8 mmol/L; health Cut-offs diabetes underwent survey, selected IGT: appropriate. OGT testing. N=896, using random 7.8 mmol/L≥ males 51.5%, mean sampling. 2hPG age 67 ± 3.7 years. <11.1 mmol/L; FPG <6.1 mmol/L Unclear level Older participants in a Included patients without known Not Not Not ROC Kramer () Level III-3 Not reported of bias in cross-sectional study diabetes; no other inclusion or reported reported reported analysis San Diego, Cross-sectional study as who underwent exclusion criteria described. USA study of population concurrent OGT and selection, and HbA1c tests between older study flow and 1984 and 1987; adults; subgroup timing, not selection and analysis of larger well recruitment not cohort. described. described. N=2,107 subjects, 43% males, Applicability mean age unclear as 69.4 ± 11 years. difficult to ascertain if relevant population; however, likely to be similar to Australia. Table 61: Study profiles of included studies on diagnostic accuracy of HbA1c testing for diagnosing diabetes in ethnic minorities Study and Diagnostic level Quality Study population Inclusion/exclusion criteria HbA1c HbA1c Reference Reference Outcomes location of evidence and assessment standard standard
Rathmann () Augsburg, Germany Level III-2 Elderly subgroup of participants recruited as part of health survey, selected using random sampling. Low risk of bias. No applicability concerns. Cut-offs appropriate. Patients who formed part of a cohort study: subjects who were aged 61–75 years without pre-existing diabetes underwent OGT testing. N=896, males 51.5%, mean age 67 ± 3.7 years. Included patients without diabetes aged 61–75 years. Excluded patients with acute illness who could not undergo OGT testing, and people whose data was incomplete. 5.7%≥ HbA1c <6.5% ≥6.5% IFG: 6.1 mmol/L≥ FPG <7.0 mmol/L; 2hPG <7.8 mmol/L; IGT: 7.8 mmol/L≥ 2hPG <11.1 mmol/L; FPG <6.1 mmol/L FPG ≥7.0 2hPG ≥7.8 3x3 table, ROC analysis Kramer () San Diego, USA Level III-3 Cross-sectional study of older adults; subgroup analysis of larger cohort. Unclear level of bias in study as population selection, and study flow and timing, not well described. Applicability unclear as difficult to ascertain if relevant population; however, likely to be similar to Australia. Older participants in a cross-sectional study who underwent concurrent OGT and HbA1c tests between 1984 and 1987; selection and recruitment not described. N=2,107 subjects, 43% males, mean age 69.4 ± 11 years. Included patients without known diabetes; no other inclusion or exclusion criteria described. Not reported Not reported Not reported Not reported ROC analysis Table 61: Study profiles of included studies on diagnostic accuracy of HbA1c testing for diagnosing diabetes in ethnic minorities Study and location Diagnostic level of evidence and Quality assessment Study population Inclusion/exclusion criteria HbA1c HbA1c Reference standard Reference standard Outcomes
1267-FinalContractedAssessmentReport-accessible.DOCX