ArticleJournal of cross-cultural gerontology2013
Diabetes risk in older Mexican Americans: effects of language acculturation, generation and socioeconomic status.
Article in Journal of cross-cultural gerontology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diabetes and Hypertension Risk Across Acculturation and Education Levels in Hispanic/Latino Adults: The Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos.JAMA health forum · 2025Article
- Article
- How Does Acculturation Influence Smoking Behavior Among Latinos? The Role of Education and National Background.Ethnicity & disease · 2019Article
- Type 2 diabetes, depressive symptoms and disability over a 15-year follow-up period in older Mexican Americans living in the southwestern United States.Journal of diabetes and its complications · 2018Article
- Acculturation and Insulin Resistance among US Chinese Immigrant Women.Ethnicity & disease · 2015Article
- Acculturation, Gender, and Active Life Expectancy in the Mexican-Origin Population.Journal of aging and health · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The effect of language acculturation, socioeconomic status (SES), and immigrant generation on development of diabetes among Mexican Americans was evaluated in the Hispanic Established Population for the Epidemiologic Study of the Elderly (HEPESE). HEPESE is a longitudinal cohort study of 3,050 non-institutionalized Mexican Americans aged 65 years at baseline (1993-1994) from 5 Southwestern states. Diabetes incidence was ascertained in 4 follow-up surveys to 2004-05 by respondent self-reported physician-diagnosis of diabetes, high blood glucose, or sugar in the urine. Language of interview, immigrant generation, gender, age, education, family history of diabetes, smoking status, alcohol use, health insurance type and self-reported height and weight were assessed. High socioeconomic status (SES) was defined by high school graduation and non-Medicaid insurance. Cox's proportional hazards models were fit to evaluate the effects of language acculturation, generation and SES on incident diabetes. 845 of 3,050 (27.7%) Mexican Americans had diabetes at baseline and were younger, more educated, and more likely to have health insurance than those without diabetes. Risk of developing diabetes increased for Spanish-speaking respondents with low SES from 1st to 3rd generation (HR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.02-3.03) and from 2nd to 3rd generation (HR = 2.15, 95% CI = 1.20-3.84). Among English-speaking, high SES participants, generation had a protective effect on developing diabetes: HR = 0.45 (95% CI = 0.22-0.91) when comparing 3rd versus 1st generation. The effect of language acculturation and immigrant generation on incident diabetes is moderated by SES status in HEPESE participants.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.