Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Flow diagram of the recruitment of Chinese subjects.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 1.

General and clinical characteristics of Chinese subjects.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Number of subjects according to the categorization of glycemic status using FPG and 2h-PG based on the 1999 WHO diagnostic criteria.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Age-adjusted partial correlations between sAGEP and FPG, 2h-PG, and HbA1c.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 2.

The ROC curves generated by the logistic regression models on FPG, HbA1c, sAGEP, FPG-HbA1c and FPG-sAGEP.

ROC, receiver operating characteristic; FPG, fasting plasma glucose; HbA1c, glycated haemoglobin A1c; sAGEP, serum advanced glycation end products-peptides; FPG-HbA1c, FPG plus HbA1c; FPG-sAGEP, FPG plus sAGEP. The areas under the ROC curves for FPG, HbA1c, sAGEP, FPG-HbA1c and FPG-sAGEP were 0.772, 0.838, 0.894, 0.845, and 0.899, respectively. Comparisons among these areas were as follows: FPG-sAGEP vs. FPG-HbA1c (P = 0.0003), FPG-sAGEP vs. sAGEP (P = 0.58), FPG-sAGEP vs. HbA1c (P <0.001), FPG-sAGEP vs. FPG (P <0.001), FPG-HbA1c vs. FPG (P <0.001), sAGEP vs. HbA1c (P = 0.006), sAGEP vs. FPG (P <0.001).

More »

Fig 2 Expand