Skip to main content

Table 2 Logistic regression analysis of associations between lipids and type 2 diabetes

From: Associations between non-traditional lipid measures and risk for type 2 diabetes mellitus in a Chinese community population: a cross-sectional study

   Odds ratio (OR) (95 % CI) Sensitivity analysesd
  SD Model 1a Model 2b Model 3c Odds ratio (95 % CI)
LDL-C (mmol/L) 0.6086 1.57(1.45–1.70) 1.21(1.10–1.33) 1.14(1.04–1.25) 1.21(1.03–1.43)
HDL-C (mmol/L) 0.2696 0.68(0.61–0.75) 0.68(0.61–0.76) 0.74(0.66–0.83) 0.66(0.54–0.81)
TG (mmol/L)e 0.5976 1.68(1.56–1.82) 1.49(1.36–1.63) 1.38(1.25–1.53) 1.55(1.31–1.84)
TC (mmol/L) 0.8792 1.50(1.39–1.63) 1.18(1.08–1.29) 1.13(1.03–1.24) 1.18(1.00–1.38)
Non-HDL-C (mmol/L) 0.8595 1.66(1.54–1.80) 1.31(1.20–1.44) 1.23(1.12–1.35) 1.32(1.12–1.55)
TG/HDL-Cf 0.7256 1.71(1.58–1.85) 1.56(1.42–1.72) 1.45(1.31–1.60) 1.64(1.38–1.96)
TC/HDL-C 1.0356 1.70(1.57–1.83) 1.52(1.39–1.66) 1.42(1.30–1.57) 1.59(1.37–1.85)
  1. Odds ratio (OR) (95 % CI) per 1 SD change. HDL-C high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, LDL-C low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, Non-HDL-C non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, SD standard deviation, TC total cholesterol, TG triglycerides
  2. aUnadjusted
  3. bAdjusted for age, sex, marital status, personal monthly income level, education level, smoking, drinking, physical activity, and hypertension
  4. cAdditionally adjusted for BMI
  5. dAdjusted for model 3 and further excluded individuals with hypertension
  6. eLog-transformed TG used
  7. fLog-transformed TG/HDL-C used