ArticleDiabetes research and clinical practice2025
Which adiposity index is best? Comparison of five indicators and their ability to identify type 2 diabetes risk in a population study.
Article in Diabetes research and clinical practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association between trajectories of waist circumference with incidence of type 2 diabetes mellitus, Tehran lipid and glucose study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Determination of the Optimal Cut-Off Point of Anthropometric Indices to Predict the Risk of Metabolic Syndrome in Iranian Adult Population With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Cross-Sectional-Analytical Study.Endocrinology, diabetes & metabolism · 2026Article
- Combined effects of glycemic status and adiposity on cardiovascular risk in chronic kidney disease: A nationwide population-based study.World journal of diabetes · 2026Article
- The WHO BMI System Misclassifies Weight Status in Adults from the General Population in North Italy: A DXA-Based Assessment Study (18-98 Years).Nutrients · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsWe compared ability of five adiposity indicators [body mass index (BMI), waist circumference (WC), waist-to-height ratio (WHtR), waist-by-height
methodsBaseline data were from 7,979 participants of UK Whitehall II study, of whom 7,488 diabetes-free participants were followed-up (median = 16.0 years) for incident diabetes (n = 940). According to five indices' cut-points, participants were separately classified into low-value groups and high-value groups. We cross-sectionally investigated ability of the indicators to identify existing diabetes by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, and explored prospective associations between elevated indices and diabetes using Cox regression analysis.
resultsWaist-based indicators were superior to BMI in identifying diabetes. High WHtR (≥0.5) demonstrated the highest multivariable-adjusted HR [2.64 (95 % CI 2.29, 3.03)]. Across all indicators, associations between elevated indicators and diabetes were stronger in younger participants. In combined analyses, "low BMI but high WHtR" had higher risk for diabetes [2.20 (95 % CI 1.65, 2.95)] than "high BMI but low WHtR" [1.34 (95 % CI 1.05, 1.70)].
conclusionWaist-based indicators are more strongly associated with diabetes than BMI. WHtR, an easy-to-calculate, waist-based index with a sex- and race-independent cut-point, may be useful for diabetes prevention.
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.