Table 1

Overview of studies reporting prevalence of type 2 diabetes by markers of SES and the association between increasing SES and diabetes in India

First authorStudy periodCoverageSettingAgeSample sizeDiabetes assessmentSES markerGenderDiabetes prevalence: low SES (l); high SES (h)SES–diabetes association: OR (95% confidence interval) for high SES versus low SES
Singh71994LocalRural25–641769Blood glucoseCompositeMale0.9% (l); 6.1% (h)*
Female0.9% (l); 6.9% (h)*
Singh81994LocalRural25–641806Blood glucoseCompositeMale2.5% (l); 8.6% (h)*2.03 (1.86 to 2.51)*
Female1.2% (l); 6.9% (h)*1.97 (1.67 to 2.36)*
Singh91994LocalCombined25–643575Blood glucoseCompositeMale4.07 (1.89 to 10.01)* (Urban)
3.75 (1.37 to 12.78)* (Rural)
Female1.48 (0.64 to 4.00) (Urban)
2.55 (0.91 to 8.83) (Rural)
Singh101998RegionalUrban25–643257Blood glucoseCompositeFemale0.5% (l); 4.8% (h)*
Ramachandran42000RegionalUrban20+11 216Blood glucoseIncomeCombined12.5% (l); 21.6% (h)*1.43 (1.30 to 1.57)*; 1.16 (1.05 to 1.30)*
Ramachandran111999–2000LocalUrban40+2383Blood glucose, drug treatmentIncomeCombined12.6% (l); 25.5% (h)*2.15 (1.70 to 2.72)
Gupta121999–2001LocalUrban20+1123Self-reportEducationMale6.8% (l); 7.9% (h)
Female6.6% (l); 8.3% (h)
Reddy132002–2003RegionalUrban20–6919 973Blood glucose, drug treatmentEducationMale7.6% (l); 8.4% (h)1.11 (0.71 to 1.67)
Female11.2% (l); 4.2% (h)*0.36 (0.23 to 0.56)*
Mohan62003–2005RegionalCombined15–6444 523Self-reportEducationCombined3.4% (l); 5.6% (h)*3.02 (2.45 to 3.71)*
Ajay142002–2003RegionalUrban20–6910 930Blood glucose, drug treatmentEducationCombined11.6% (l); 6.9% (h)*0.69 (0.54 to 0.89)*
Vijayakumar152007LocalRural18+1990Blood glucose, self-reportSocial casteCombined5.9% (l); 17.4% (h)
WealthCombined1.43 (1.04 to 1.95)*
Gupta161999–2003LocalUrban20–591289Blood glucose, self-reportEducationMale8.0% (l); 18.8% (h)*
Female6.0% (l); 34.7% (h)*
Combined6.9% (l); 26.4% (h)*
Kinra172005–2007RegionalRural20–691983Blood glucose, self-reportWealthMale1.8% (l); 8.0% (h)*
Female3.9% (l); 5.1% (h)
Samuel181969–2002RegionalUrban26–322218Blood glucose,drug treatmentWealthMale26.2% (l); 31.9% (h)*
Female12.1% (l); 30.3% (h)*
RuralMale10.9% (l); 31.8% (h)*
Female16.1% (l); 32.1% (h)*
CombinedCombined2.8 (1.9 to 4.1)*
UrbanEducationMale15.0% (l); 34.7% (h)*
Female31.5% (l); 32.2% (h)
RuralMale25.7% (l); 19.7% (h)
Female19.1% (l); 50.0% (h)
CombinedCombined1.0 (0.6 to 1.6)
Zaman192005RegionalRural30+4535Blood glucose, self-reportIncomeMale16.2% (l); 21.2% (h)*
Female12.1% (l); 15.0% (h)*
EducationMale12.4% (l); 20.1% (h)*
Female12.8% (l); 13.1% (h)
  • SES markers defined as education, household wealth, social caste or a composite of two or more measures.

  • *p<0.05.

  • –, Indicates not reported; SES, socioeconomic status.

  • Includes impaired glucose tolerance and impaired fasting glucose.