Gender differences in diabetes knowledge, glycemic control, and cardiovascular risk among adults with type 2 diabetes: a cross-sectional study

Background Gender differences in diabetes knowledge, glycemic control, and cardiovascular risk remain an important public health concern. This study examined gender differences in diabetes knowledge, glycemic control, and cardiovascular risk among adults with type 2 diabetes in Saudi Arabia, with sociodemographic characteristics, lifestyle behaviors, healthcare utilization, and perceptions of recent social reforms explored as contextual factors. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted among 336 adults with type 2 diabetes attending primary healthcare centers. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire assessing diabetes knowledge, healthcare utilization, lifestyle behaviors, and perceptions of social reforms. Clinical data included HbA1c and Framingham Risk Score (FRS) variables. Logistic regression models were developed separately for males and females. Results Women demonstrated higher diabetes knowledge than men (59.5% vs . 44.6%, p = 0.016). Among men, university education or higher was associated with substantially greater odds of appropriate knowledge compared with illiteracy (adjusted OR = 7.81, 95% CI: 1.99–30.72; p = 0.003), while among women the association remained significant but of smaller magnitude (adjusted OR = 3.93, 95% CI: 1.52–10.14; p = 0.005). Younger age was independently associated with better knowledge in both genders; participants aged 18–40 years had markedly higher odds compared with those aged >60 years (men: OR = 12.67, 95% CI: 2.67–60.05; p = 0.001; women: OR = 11.43, 95% CI: 3.79–34.51; p < 0.001). Most participants had suboptimal glycemic control, with 47.9% showing HbA1c >8% and only 19.9% achieving HbA1c <7% (p=0.889). Physical inactivity was highly prevalent, with 55.7% never engaging in exercise, and significant gender differences were observed in exercise frequency (p<0.001). Smoking was markedly higher among males (p<0.001) and contributed to higher FRS categories in men. Conclusion Although most participants reported easy access to healthcare services, gender differences in diabetes knowledge and cardiovascular risk remained evident, while glycemic control was suboptimal across both genders. These findings underscore the need for gender-sensitive diabetes education, targeted physical activity interventions, and routine cardiovascular risk assessment as integral components of diabetes care.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Frontiers in Endocrinology
Published
2026-03-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2026.1763252
Primary Topic
Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Gender differences in diabetes knowledge, glycemic control, and cardiovascular risk among adults with type 2 diabetes: a cross-sectional study

A Madkhali, Tahani Madkhali, Norah Rajeh, Areej Ali Hamdi et al.
Frontiers in Endocrinology
Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
article

Gender differences in diabetes knowledge, glycemic control, and cardiovascular risk among adults with type 2 diabetes: a cross-sectional study

A Madkhali, Tahani Madkhali, Norah Rajeh, Areej Ali Hamdi, Aisha Awaf, Mahfouz, Hatim Alessa, Taif Solan, Mohammed Majrashi, Afaf Hakami, Ayyub Alssum, Bayan Hassan Hakami, Osama Albasheer, Wedad M. Alhazmi, Rania Hassan
article en

Abstract

Background Gender differences in diabetes knowledge, glycemic control, and cardiovascular risk remain an important public health concern. This study examined gender differences in diabetes knowledge, glycemic control, and cardiovascular risk among adults with type 2 diabetes in Saudi Arabia, with sociodemographic characteristics, lifestyle behaviors, healthcare utilization, and perceptions of recent social reforms explored as contextual factors. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted among 336 adults with type 2 diabetes attending primary healthcare centers. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire assessing diabetes knowledge, healthcare utilization, lifestyle behaviors, and perceptions of social reforms. Clinical data included HbA1c and Framingham Risk Score (FRS) variables. Logistic regression models were developed separately for males and females. Results Women demonstrated higher diabetes knowledge than men (59.5% vs . 44.6%, p = 0.016). Among men, university education or higher was associated with substantially greater odds of appropriate knowledge compared with illiteracy (adjusted OR = 7.81, 95% CI: 1.99–30.72; p = 0.003), while among women the association remained significant but of smaller magnitude (adjusted OR = 3.93, 95% CI: 1.52–10.14; p = 0.005). Younger age was independently associated with better knowledge in both genders; participants aged 18–40 years had markedly higher odds compared with those aged >60 years (men: OR = 12.67, 95% CI: 2.67–60.05; p = 0.001; women: OR = 11.43, 95% CI: 3.79–34.51; p < 0.001). Most participants had suboptimal glycemic control, with 47.9% showing HbA1c >8% and only 19.9% achieving HbA1c <7% (p=0.889). Physical inactivity was highly prevalent, with 55.7% never engaging in exercise, and significant gender differences were observed in exercise frequency (p<0.001). Smoking was markedly higher among males (p<0.001) and contributed to higher FRS categories in men. Conclusion Although most participants reported easy access to healthcare services, gender differences in diabetes knowledge and cardiovascular risk remained evident, while glycemic control was suboptimal across both genders. These findings underscore the need for gender-sensitive diabetes education, targeted physical activity interventions, and routine cardiovascular risk assessment as integral components of diabetes care.

Frontiers in EndocrinologyVol. 17
Diabetes Australia (AU), Primary HealthCare (MT), Ministry of Health (MM), King Fahad Central Hospital (SA), Ministry of Health (BH), Jazan University (SA)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 24%
Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.