Skip to main content

Table 5 Comparison among subjects free of metabolic syndrome, WHO-defined metabolic syndrome and surplus IDF-defined metabolic syndrome.

From: Analysis of agreement among definitions of metabolic syndrome in nondiabetic Turkish adults: a methodological study

Parameter

No-MS

WHO-MS

Surplus-MS (IDF)

ANOVA p

Frequency (n)

50% (790)

20% (314)

30% (464)

 

Age (years)

42 ± 13

47 ± 12a

49 ± 13b

<0.001

BMI (kg/m2)

27 ± 4

33 ± 5a

31 ± 4b,c

<0.001

SBP (mmHg)

124 ± 19

145 ± 22a

142 ± 26b

<0.001

DBP(mmHg)

80 ± 11

92 ± 12a

90 ± 12b,c

<0.001

Glucose (mmol/l)

4.8 ± 0.4

5.4 ± 0.6a

5.0 ± 0.6b,c

<0.001

Log insulin (pmol/l)

1.60 ± 0.22

2.01 ± 0.13a

1.69 ± 0.17b,c

<0.001

Log HOMA-IR

0.07 ± 0.23

0.53 ± 0.14a

0.18 ± 0.18b,c

<0.001

Framingham risk score

1.10 ± 1.87

2.99 ± 4.64a

2.93 ± 4.54b

<0.001

Women:

    

Frequency (n)

51% (525)

18% (191)

31% (320)

 

Waist (cm)

86.0 ± 11.4

102.8 ± 9.7a

95.8 ± 9.5b,c

<0.001

TC (mmol/l)

4.64 ± 1.06

4.99 ± 1.13a

4.86 ± 1.00b

<0.001

HDL-C (mmol/l)

1.36 ± 0.31

1.07 ± 0.26a

1.09 ± 0.23b

<0.001

LDL-C (mmol/l)

2.82 ± 0.92

3.06 ± 0.97a

3.04 ± 0.85b

<0.001

Log TG (mmol/l)

-0.02 ± 0.16

0.23 ± 0.19a

0.16 ± 0.19b,c

<0.001

Men:

    

Frequency (n)

50% (265)

23% (123)

27% (144)

 

Waist (cm)

94.2 ± 9.8

107.0 ± 8.3a

103.1 ± 6.0b,c

<0.001

TC (mmol/l)

4.57 ± 0.93

4.89 ± 0.91a

4.79 ± 0.94

0.004

HDL-C (mmol/l)

1.08 ± 0.24

0.92 ± 0.22a

0.92 ± 0.24b

<0.001

LDL-C (mmol/l)

2.90 ± 0.82

2.90 ± 0.81

2.92 ± 0.84

0.957

Log TG (mmol/l)

0.07 ± 0.19

0.32 ± 0.23a

0.25 ± 0.22b,c

<0.001

  1. Please see list of abbreviations used. Data is presented as mean ± SD. No-MS: subjects free of metabolic syndrome (WHO and IDF negative), WHO-MS: metabolic syndrome by WHO definition, including subjects identified concordantly by IDF (WHO positive, IDF either positive or negative), surplus-MS: subjects identified additionally as metabolic syndrome by only IDF definition (WHO negative, IDF positive).
  2. a: p < 0.05 No-MS vs. WHO-MS, estimated by post hoc Tukey's test
  3. b: p < 0.05 No-MS vs. surplus-MS (IDF), estimated by post hoc Tukey's test
  4. c: p < 0.05 WHO-MS vs. surplus-MS (IDF), estimated by post hoc Tukey's test.