Table 1 shows the characteristics of the study population depending on DM. There were 2903 participants (11.3%) in the DM group and 22,694 participants (88.7%) in the non-DM group and more women (n = 1486) than men (n = 1417; 48.8%). Mean patient age in the DM group was 60.09 ± 0.31 years, which was higher than that in the non-DM group. With regard to education level, “below primary school” was the most common response (n = 1299; 44.8%) in the DM group, whereas “high school” was the most common response (n = 7668; 33.8%) in the non-DM group (p < 0.0001). Mean BMI (kg/m2) was higher in the DM group (25.3 ± 0.1) than in the non-DM group (23.6 ± 0.03) (p < 0.0001); there were 1490 (51.3%) participants with a normal weight in the DM group and 14,766 (65.1%) in the non-DM group, showing higher percentages than both the underweight and overweight and obesity subgroups (p < 0.0001). There were more non−/ex-smokers in the DM group (n = 18,983; 83.7%) than in the non-DM group (n = 2352; 81%) (p = 0.0076). With regard to alcohol consumption, the number of participants who responded “yes” was 2284 (78.7%) in the DM group and 19,781 (87.2%) in the non-DM group, which was much higher than the number of participants who responded “no” (p < 0.0001).
Table 1 Characteristics of the study population with and without diabetes mellitus As for clinical factors that influence DM, the DM group showed a higher percentage and mean value for waist circumference, a high waist circumference, FBS level (mg/dL), HbA1c level, hypertension, hypertriglyceridemia, and a low HDL cholesterol level than the non-DM group (p < 0.0001). However, there were no significant differences in daily iron intake or Hb level.
Table 2 shows the characteristics of the study population depending on diabetes and anemia. There were 2258 participants (8.9%) in the anemia group and 23,339 (91.1%) in the non-anemia group, and there were more women (n = 1796, 79.5%) than men in the anemia group (n = 462, 20.5%) (p < 0.0001). Mean patient age in the anemia group with DM was 65.93 ± 0.86 years, which was higher than that in the non-anemia group in DM and all groups in non-DM (p < 0.0001). Regarding household income, the prevalence of anemia tended to be higher among the lower income quartiles in the DM group, whereas it tended to increase with an increasing income level in the non-DM group.
Table 2 Characteristics according to with or without of diabetes and anemia With regard to education level in the non-DM group, “high school” was the most common response in both the anemia (n = 678, 35.1%) and non-anemia (n = 6990, 33.7%) groups (p < 0.0001). In contrast, the most common education level in the DM group was “≤Elementary school” in both the anemia (n = 181, 55.2%) and non-anemia (n = 1118, 43.4%) groups (p < 0.0001). Mean BMI (kg/m2) was higher in the non-anemia group than in the anemia group in both the non-DM and DM groups (p < 0.0001). In the anemia group, the proportion of current smokers in the DM group (12.8%) was relatively higher than that in the non-DM group (5.1%) (p < 0.0001). Regarding clinical factors that influence anemia, there were significant differences in the daily iron intake (mg/day), Hb level (g/dL), serum creatinine level (mg/dL), waist circumference, high waist circumference, and fasting glucose level (mg/dL) between the two groups.
Table 3 shows the characteristics of the study population depending on anemia by sex in DM. Among men, there were significant differences between the anemia and non-anemia groups except in alcohol consumption and low HDL cholesterol factors. Among women, there were significant differences between the groups in age, mean BMI, daily iron intake, Hb level, serum creatinine level, waist circumference, high waist circumference, fasting glucose level, and HbA1c level.
Table 3 Characteristics of the study population with and without anemia according to sex in diabetes mellitus Table 4 shows the association between DM and anemia analyzed using logistic regression analyses by sex; the results were significant in both the unadjusted model (Model 1) and adjusted models (Models 2 and 3) for men. In particular, the ORs for anemia in the DM group were higher than those in the non-DM group by 3.49-fold (95% CI 2.69–4.53, p < 0.0001), 2.18-fold (95% CI 1.67–2.85, p < 0.0001), and 1.87-fold (95% CI 1.42–2.50, p < 0.0001) in Models 1, 2, and 3, respectively. For women, the results were not significant in the unadjusted model (Model 1), although they were significant in the adjusted models (Models 2 and 3). In particular, the ORs for anemia were higher in the DM group than those in the non-DM group by 1.31-fold (95% CI 1.07–1.60, p = 0.0093) and 1.33-fold (95% CI 1.09–1.63, p = 0.0067) in Models 2 and 3, respectively. Compared to the group without a history of DM, OR for the incident DM was significantly higher in an unadjusted model (OR: 3.49; 95% CI: 2.69–4.53); the association observed remained significant in Model 2 (OR: 3.10; 95% CI: 2.38–4.04) and Model 3 (OR: 2.97; 95% CI: 2.27–3.89). Among men (the reference category for sex), compared to the group without a history of DM, OR for the incident DM was significantly higher in an unadjusted model (OR: 3.49; 95% CI: 2.69–4.53); the association observed remained significant in Model 2 (OR: 3.10; 95% CI: 2.38–4.04) and Model 3 (OR: 2.97; 95% CI: 2.27–3.89).
Table 4 Logistic regression analyses of the association between anemia and DM by sex Moreover, among those with no DM (the reference category for diabetes), men had a 5.52-fold higher OR for anemia (95% CI 4.73–6.45, p < 0.0001) in Model 1, 4.36-fold higher OR (95% CI 3.70–5.14, p < 0.0001) in Model 2, 5.66-fold higher OR (95% CI 4.61–6.95, p < 0.0001) in Model 3 than women.
Lastly, our study demonstrated a significant association in the interaction between sex and DM on the development of anemia in Model 1 (OR: 0.35; 95% CI: 0.25–0.49, p < 0.0001), Model 2 (OR: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.27–0.52, p < 0.0001), and Model 3 (OR: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.27–0.54, p < 0.0001) in Additional file 1. This can be interpreted as the odds for anemia for those with DM versus no DM being higher for men (the reference category for sex) than for women.
Table 5 shows the results of logistic regression analyses on regarding the influence of risk factors on the prevalence of anemia among patients with DM as the change in the odds ratio for a unit change in the continuous variables. The results were significant for daily iron intake, serum creatinine level, high waist circumference, and hypertriglyceridemia in Models 1, 2, and 3. In particular, the serum creatinine level showed ORs of 6.28 (95% CI 3.95–9.99, p < 0.0001), 14.28 (95% CI 8.15–25.01, p < 0.0001), and 13.40 (95% CI 7.64–23.51, p < 0.0001) in Models 1, 2, and 3, respectively, which indicates that the serum creatinine level is a highly influential risk factor for anemia in patients with DM.
Table 5 Odds ratios for risk factors of anemia in patients with diabetes by sex A high waist circumference showed significant ORs of 0.59 (95% CI 0.44–0.79, p = 0.0004), 0.52 (95% CI 0.31–0.88, p = 0.015), and 0.47 (95% CI 0.26–0.83, p = 0.0097) in Models 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Hypertriglyceridemia also showed significant ORs of 0.49 (95% CI 0.34–0.70, p < 0.0001), 0.69 (95% CI 0.42–0.90, p = 0.0129), and 0.62 (95% CI 0.41–0.92, p = 0.0179) in Models 1, 2, and 3, respectively.
When the influence of risk factors on the prevalence of anemia among patients with DM was examined by sex, the results showed slight differences between men and women. Among men, the serum creatinine level, hypertension, and hypertriglyceridemia were significant factors in both the unadjusted (Model 1) and adjusted (Models 2 and 3) models. The serum creatinine level showed significant ORs of 10.31 (95% CI 5.40–19.70, p < 0.0001), 8.00 (95% CI 3.84–16.65, p < 0.0001), and 6.30 (95% CI 3.08–12.90, p < 0.0001) in Models 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Hypertension also showed significant ORs of 2.49 (95% CI 1.61–3.85, p < 0.0001), 2.14 (95% CI 1.31–3.49, p = 0.0025), and 1.86 (95% CI 1.18–3.13, p = 0.0191) in Models 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Additionally, hypertriglyceridemia showed significant ORs of 0.24 (95% CI 0.13–0.43, p < 0.0001), 0.38 (95% CI 0.20–0.72, p = 0.003), and 0.40 (95% CI 0.21–0.77, p = 0.0065) in Models 1, 2, and 3, respectively.
Among women, the serum creatinine level and a high waist circumference showed significant ORs in Models 1, 2, and 3 (OR = 34.50, 95% CI 13.98–85.12, p < 0.0001 in Model 1; OR = 37.12, 95% CI 15.35–89.76, p < 0.0001 in Model 2; and OR = 42.63, 95% CI 17.25–105.36, p < 0.0001 in Model 3). A high waist circumference alone showed significant ORs of 0.61 (95% CI 0.42–0.89, p = 0.01), 0.49 (95% CI 0.28–0.87, p = 0.0149), and 0.38 (95% CI 0.21–0.71, p = 0.0022) in Models 1, 2, and 3, respectively.