SummaryBackgroundDiabetes has been defined on the basis of different biomarkers, including fasting plasma glucose (FPG), 2-h plasma glucose in an oral glucose tolerance test (2hOGTT), and HbA1c. We assessed the effect of different diagnostic definitions on both the population prevalence of diabetes and the classification of previously undiagnosed individuals as having diabetes versus not having diabetes in a pooled analysis of data from population-based health examination surveys in different regions.MethodsWe used data from 96 population-based health examination surveys that had measured at least two of the biomarkers used for defining diabetes. Diabetes was defined using HbA1c (HbA1c ≥6·5% or history of diabetes diagnosis or using insulin or oral hypoglycaemic drugs) compared with either FPG only or FPG-or-2hOGTT definitions (FPG ≥7·0 mmol/L or 2hOGTT ≥11·1 mmol/L or history of diabetes or using insulin or oral hypoglycaemic drugs). We calculated diabetes prevalence, taking into account complex survey design and survey sample weights. We compared the prevalences of diabetes using different definitions graphically and by regression analyses. We calculated sensitivity and specificity of diabetes diagnosis based on HbA1c compared with diagnosis based on glucose among previously undiagnosed individuals (ie, excluding those with history of diabetes or using insulin or oral hypoglycaemic drugs). We calculated sensitivity and specificity in each survey, and then pooled results using a random-effects model. We assessed the sources of heterogeneity of sensitivity by meta-regressions for study characteristics selected a priori.FindingsPopulation prevalence of diabetes based on FPG-or-2hOGTT was correlated with prevalence based on FPG alone (r=0·98), but was higher by 2–6 percentage points at different prevalence levels. Prevalence based on HbA1c was lower than prevalence based on FPG in 42·8% of age–sex–survey groups and higher in another 41·6%; in the other 15·6%, the two definitions provided similar prevalence estimates. The variation across studies in the relation between glucose-based and HbA1c-based prevalences was partly related to participants' age, followed by natural logarithm of per person gross domestic product, the year of survey, mean BMI, and whether the survey population was national, subnational, or from specific communities. Diabetes defined as HbA1c 6·5% or more had a pooled sensitivity of 52·8% (95% CI 51·3–54·3%) and a pooled specificity of 99·74% (99·71–99·78%) compared with FPG 7·0 mmol/L or more for diagnosing previously undiagnosed participants; sensitivity compared with diabetes defined based on FPG-or-2hOGTT was 30·5% (28·7–32·3%). None of the preselected study-level characteristics explained the heterogeneity in the sensitivity of HbA1c versus FPG.InterpretationDifferent biomarkers and definitions for diabetes can provide different estimates of population prevalence of diabetes, and differentially identify people without previous diagnosis as having diabetes. Using an HbA1c-based definition alo...

BACKGROUND.Prior studies suggest that obese men have lower prostate‐specific antigen (PSA) levels than leaner men. Caucasian (CA) men also may have lower PSA levels than African‐American (AA) men, but the relevance of body size to racial disparities in PSA levels is unclear. The association between body mass index (BMI) and height on PSA and percentage of free PSA (%fPSA) was investigated within AA and CA men without a prior prostate cancer diagnosis.METHODS.AA (n = 150) and CA (n = 149) men of similar socioeconomic status completed an extensive in‐person interview and donated blood. PSA and %fPSA levels were compared across race, BMI, and height categories after adjusting for age and other factors.RESULTS.PSA levels decreased with increasing BMI (PSA = .72, .69, .67, .59 ng/mL for BMI 18.5 to <25, 25 to <30, 30 to <35, and ≥35, respectively; Ptrend = .18), and trends were significant among men less than age 60 years (PSA = .81, .76, .66, .59, respectively; Ptrend = .02). fPSA also significantly decreased with BMI among men <60 years (Ptrend = .04). In contrast, %fPSA was not associated with BMI. However, %fPSA increased 27% across height categories (Ptrend = .02). PSA levels were significantly lower among CA men (PSAAA = 0.87, PSACA = 0.63 ng/mL; P < .01), whereas %fPSA levels did not differ by race. Also, associations between body size and PSA or %fPSA did not significantly differ by race, and adjustment for BMI and height had no effect on the racial disparity in PSA (PSAAA = 0.87, PSACA = 0.63 ng/mL; P < .01).CONCLUSIONS.The data suggest that race, BMI, and height are independently associated with PSA and %fPSA levels. Cancer 2006. © 2006 American Cancer Society.

A clear awareness of a patient's knowledge, values, and perspectives is an important component of effective genetic counseling. Advances in precision medicine, however, have outpaced our understanding of patient perceptions of this new approach. Patient views may differ across the three domains of precision medicine (genetics, behavioral, and environmental determinants of health), ethnic/racial groups, and health literacy levels. This study describes and compares group differences in familiarity, perceptions, and preferences for precision medicine in a diverse sample. Between 2016 and 2017, 252 participants completed a 10-15-min survey in three primary care clinics in Florida and Tennessee. The final sample was 42.5% African American/Black, 25.8% Hispanic/Latino, 25.0% White, and 6.7% other ethnicity/race. Less than a quarter of participants reported being familiar with the term "precision medicine," but were more familiar with basic genetic terms. Participants with higher health literacy reported greater familiarity with terms (p ≤ .003). African Americans/Black participants were more likely to identify ethnicity/race and discrimination as influencing their health (p ≤ .004). When deciding to get a genetic test, individuals across ethnic/racial groups shared similar considerations. Those with higher health literacy, however, gave significantly greater importance to provider trust (p ≤ .008). Given the recent emergence of precision medicine, at present there may be limited differences in patient perceptions across ethnic/racial groups. Culturally sensitive efforts, tailored to health literacy level, may aid equitable precision medicine uptake.

Aim: Promote safe breastfeeding during the pandemic. Methods: All participants were encouraged to request safe breastfeeding education from their prenatal provider. Pregnant mothers received appropriate breastfeeding and COVID-19 safe breastfeeding education in line with the CDC’s COVID-19 breastfeeding guidelines. Data were obtained from 39 mothers attending Nashville General Hospital pediatric well-baby clinics (Group I: from December 2019 to June 2020) and 97 pregnant women attending prenatal clinics (Group II: from July 2020 to August 2021). Results: The participants’ ages ranged from 15 to 45 years, with a mean of 27.5 ± 6.2. The women in both groups were similar in age, education, employment, and breastfeeding experience. They were equally unlikely to use face masks at home even while receiving guests or holding their babies. Although 121 (89.0%) women claimed face mask use while shopping, the rate for never doing so was 7 (18.0%) vs. 8 (8.3%) (p < 0.006) for Groups I and II, respectively. Safe practices included limited outing (66 (48.5%)), sanitized hands (62 (45.6%)), restricted visitors (44 (32.4%)), and limited baby outing (27 (19.9%)), and 8 (8.3%) in Group II received COVID-19 vaccinations. About half described fair and accurate COVID-19 safe breastfeeding knowledge, but 22 (30.1%) of them claimed they received no information. Breastfeeding contraindication awareness for Groups I and II were as follows: cocaine = 53.8% vs. 37.1%, p < 0.06; HIV = 35.9% vs. 12.4%, p < 0.002; breast cancer = 17.9% vs. 16.5%; and COVID-19 with symptoms = 28.2% vs. 5.2%, p < 0.001. The information source was similar, with family, friends, and media accounting for 77 (56.6%) of women while doctors, nurses, and the CLC was the source for 21 (15.4%) women. Exclusive breastfeeding one month postpartum for Groups I and II was 41.9% and 12.8% (p < 0.006), respectively. Conclusion: The mothers were not more knowledgeable regarding breastfeeding safely one year into the COVID-19 pandemic. Conflicting lay information can create healthy behavior ambivalence, which can be prevented by health professionals confidently advising mothers to wear face masks when breastfeeding, restricting visitors and outings, and accepting COVID-19 vaccination. This pandemic remains an open opportunity to promote and encourage breastfeeding to every mother as the default newborn feeding method.

Purpose Prior studies conducted primarily among white men, find a reduced risk of prostate cancer associated with time since developing diabetes. While biologic explanations are plausible, the association may in part arise from more frequent prostate cancer screening among those with a diabetes diagnosis. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the association between diabetes and prostate cancer screening. Methods We examined differences in prostate cancer screening (prostate-specific antigen and/or digital rectal examination) testing practices after a diabetes diagnosis among lower-income persons living in the southeastern United States and enrolled in the Southern Community Cohort Study between 2002 and 2009. Baseline in-person interviews collected information on history of diabetes and prostate cancer screening from 18,809 black and 6,404 white men aged 40-79 years. Results After adjustment for confounding, diabetic black (odds ratio (OR) 1.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01-1.25) and white (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.03-1.51) men were more likely to undergo recent prostate cancer screening compared to non-diabetic men of the same race. The increased risk for prostate cancer screening, however, occurred primarily within the first 12 months after diabetes diagnosis. Conclusions Our results suggest that a diabetes diagnosis modestly increases the likelihood of having a prostate cancer screening test for both black and white men. The prevalence of screening was higher nearer to the time of diabetes diagnosis, which may contribute to an early increase in prostate cancer detection followed by lower prostate cancer detection after an extended time.