Table 1.
The age sex characteristics and the mean HRPF score with and without age correction.
Fig 1.
Age trend in HRPF scores in diabetics (dark circles) and non-diabetics (hollow squares) with respect to HRPF scores (A) males (B) females.
Fig 2.
(A) males (B) females: clustering of different components of functional fitness based on the pair wise coefficients of determination, using nearest neighbor clustering. Note that most coefficients are below 0.3 with the exception of balancing and muscle strength in females. Thus no single component represents overall fitness very well.
Fig 3.
Odds of being type 2 diabetic among quartiles of different components of functional fitness in comparison with morphometric indices.
Males- orange bars, females–blue bars.
Fig 4.
The ORs across first and 4th quartile for being diabetic and their confidence intervals for different fitness dimensions, collective HRPF and morphometric parameters.
A: males, B: females.
Fig 5.
The proportion of diabetic people along the first and forth quartiles of WHR and HRPF.
As expected, the proportion in the lowest HRPF and highest WHR quartiles is the largest and highest HRPF and lowest WHR quartiles the smallest. Particularly notable pattern is that individuals that have good HRPF scores had low incidence even when WHR was bad. On the other hand when WHR was good but HRPF bad, the incidence was substantially higher. Pooled data on both sexes where ranking is done separately in males and females.