BMC Public Health 2007, 7:277 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/7/277 Logistic regression analysis results The logistic regression model of factors associated with diagnosis of type 2 DM in the screening data is shown in Table 2. Individuals were more likely to be diagnosed with type 2 DM if they had abdominal obesity (odds ratio [OR] = 3.50; p < 0.0001), or had been diagnosed with dyslipi- demia (OR = 3.95; p < 0.0001) or hypertension (OR = 4.82; p < 0.0001). A BMI ≥28 kg/m2 also put individuals at a significantly higher risk of being diagnosed with type 2 DM (OR = 4.04; p < 0.0001), as did a prior CV event (OR = 3.38, p < 0.0001). After adjusting for other factors in the model, men were more likely to be diagnosed with type 2 DM than women (OR = 1.18; p < 0.001). African Americans were at a higher risk for being diagnosed with type 2 DM than were indi- viduals who responded white for race (OR = 1.67). Lower household income and increased age were also associated with increased odds of type 2 DM diagnosis. Sociodemographic data Sociodemographic characteristics of the study population sample (n = 600) and individuals with diagnosed type 1 Table 2: Logistic regression analysis of risk factors associated with being diagnosed with type 2 diabetes mellitus Odds Ratio 95% Confidence Interval P value <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 Risk Factors Abdominal Obesity BMI ≥28 kg/m2 Diagnosed Dyslipidemia Diagnosed Hypertension History of Cardiovascular event Demographic Variables Male Gender Age (10-year increase) Race Black/African American Asian/Pacific Islander American Indian/Eskimo Other Ethnicity Not Spanish/Hispanic Spanish/Hispanic Household Income ($) < 22,500 22,500–39,999 40,000–59,999 60,000–89,999 Household Size 1 Member 2 Members 3 Members 4 Members Household Area Population Size <100,000 100,000–499,999 500,000–1,999,999 Census Region New England Middle Atlantic East North Central West North Central South Atlantic East South Central West South Central Mountain 3.50 4.04 3.95 4.82 3.38 1.18 1.35 1.67 0.82 1.33 0.84 1.00 0.98 2.59 1.84 1.49 1.35 2.30 1.99 1.49 1.06 1.18 1.11 1.09 1.09 1.06 1.08 0.99 1.25 1.28 1.25 0.92 [3.31, 3.71] [3.83, 4.27] [3.75, 4.15] [4.58, 5.07] [3.19, 3.58] [1.13, 1.24] [1.33, 1.37] [1.53, 1.82] [0.63, 1.05] [1.00, 1.77] [0.66, 1.06] [0.85, 1.14] [2.39, 2.80] [1.69, 2.00] [1.36, 1.62] [1.23, 1.47] [2.06, 2.57] [1.79, 2.21] [1.33, 1.67] [0.94, 1.20] [1.10, 1.27] [1.03, 1.19 [1.03, 1.17] [0.96, 1.14] [0.96, 1.16] [0.98, 1.18] [0.88, 1.12] [1.15, 1.37] [1.14, 1.44] [1.13, 1.38] [0.82, 1.05] Reference groups: Gender = female; Race = White; Spanish = Not Spanish; Region = Pacific; HH income = $90,000+; HH size = 5+; HH Area Population size = 2,000,000+. Age was entered as a continuous variable. BMI = body mass index; HH = household Page 5 of 9 (page number not for citation purposes)