Two-stage, school and community-based population screening successfully identifies individuals and families at high-risk for type 2 diabetes: the Feel4Diabetes-study

Table 3 Prevalence of prediabetes and diabetes in parents participated in the second-stage screening

	I	II	III	IVParticipants as presented in column III, stratified by FINDRISC category			P-value*
	Participants identified with prediabetes, n (%)	Participants identified with diabetes, n (%)	Participants for whom diabetes was previously undetected among those identified with diabetes in column II, n (%)**
	Participants identified with prediabetes, n (%)	Participants identified with diabetes, n (%)		0–11	12–14	15–26
All countries (n = 2685)	623 (23.2)	81 (3.0)	40 (53.5)	13 (81.3)^a	13 (64.7)	14 (36.8)^a	0.007
HICs under austerity measures (n = 1249)	304 (24.3)	36 (2.9)	15 (40.0)	4 (57.1)	5 (66.7)	6 (27.3)	0.127
LMICs (n = 644)	84 (13.1)	26 (4.0)	21 (80.0)	8 (100.0)	7 (85.7)	6 (60.0)	0.098
HICs (n = 792)	235 (29.6)	19 (2.4)	4 (36.4)	1 (100.0)	1 (25.0)	2 (33.3)	0.368

^*P-values indicate the significance of the differences among FINDRISC categories
Figures sharing the same superscript letters differentiate significantly from each other
^** The numbers provided for this variable in the case of HICs do not include data from Finland (n = 7), since participants with previously diagnosed diabetes were excluded from the study at this study center
FINDRISC Finnish Diabetes Risk Score, HICs High-income countries, LMICs Low to middle-income countries

ISSN: 1472-6823