
==== Front
Int J Prev Med
Int J Prev Med
IJPVM
Int J Prev Med
International Journal of Preventive Medicine
2008-7802
2008-8213
Wolters Kluwer - Medknow India

IJPVM-15-5
10.4103/ijpvm.ijpvm_374_22
Review Article
A Scoping Review of Possible Solutions for Decreasing Socioeconomic Inequalities in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus
Gharacheh Laleh
Amini-Rarani Mostafa 1
Torabipour Amin 2
Karimi Saeed 3
Student Research Committee, School of Management and Medical Information Sciences, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
1 Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
2 Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran
3 Health Management and Economics Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
Address for correspondence: Dr. Mostafa Amini-Rarani, Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran. E-mail: m.amini@mng.mui.ac.ir
Dr. Saeed Karimi, Health Management and Economics Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran. E-mail: karimi@mng.mui.ac.ir
2024
31 1 2024
15 512 11 2022
17 5 2023
Copyright: © 2024 International Journal of Preventive Medicine
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
Background:

As socioeconomic inequalities are key factors in access and utilization of type 2 diabetes (T2D) services, the purpose of this scoping review was to identify solutions for decreasing socioeconomic inequalities in T2D.

Methods:

A scoping review of scientific articles from 2000 and later was conducted using PubMed, Web of Science (WOS), Scopus, Embase, and ProQuest databases. Using the Arksey and O’Malley framework for scoping review, articles were extracted, meticulously read, and thematically analyzed.

Results:

A total of 7204 articles were identified from the reviewed databases. After removing duplicate and nonrelevant articles, 117 articles were finally included and analyzed. A number of solutions and passways were extracted from the final articles. Solutions for decreasing socioeconomic inequalities in T2D were categorized into 12 main solutions and 63 passways.

Conclusions:

Applying identified solutions in diabetes policies and interventions would be recommended for decreasing socioeconomic inequalities in T2D. Also, the passways could be addressed as entry points to help better implementation of diabetic policies.

Health policy
scoping review
socioeconomic inequality
thematic analysis
type 2 diabetes
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) mellitus is one of the most prevalent diseases and the leading cause of years of life lived with disease worldwide.[1] Diabetes is among the top 10 leading cause of death in most countries.[2] Diabetes has the highest burden of noncommunicable diseases worldwide.[3] Just over 1 in 10 people in the world have diabetes.[4] There has been a rising trend in T2D prevalence turning it into a growing global epidemic. As recently estimated by the International Diabetes Federation, the number of people diagnosed worldwide will increase from 463 million in 2019 to 700 million in 2045, leading to a 51% increase in 26 years.[56]

However, the relatively high prevalence of T2D is not distributed equally among different socioeconomic groups. Socioeconomic inequalities exist in T2D, with individuals from lower socioeconomic status (SES) groups being more affected.[7] Not only are there socioeconomic variations in the prevalence of T2D, but also inequalities are evident in disease management, chronic complications,[8] and mortality.[9] Lack of knowledge on the disease condition and also unavailability of healthcare services worsen health outcomes. Timely intervention and medication are required to prevent complications, but most patients are unable to access quality health care to manage diseases.[10] Previous studies have found that people prefer hospital services based on their income, SES, and health status. Patients choose healthcare services for diabetes according to the quality of provided care.[11] Observational data over 40 years have shown consistent differences in diabetes outcomes across populations, where socioeconomically disadvantaged populations, in terms of lower education and income levels, experience less access to care and preventive services.[12] Lower rates of diagnosis, poorer health behaviors and control,[13] worse cardiometabolic outcomes,[14] and shorter life expectancy are more common for individuals from disadvantaged populations compared to those from higher socioeconomic status.[15] These findings suggest that diabetes is not a purely biological issue; its onset and progression are heavily influenced by the broader socioeconomic context.[16]

Therefore, this study aimed to identify solutions for decreasing socioeconomic inequality in T2D. This study expands on the literature by exploring how countries can decrease socioeconomic inequality for diabetic patients through evidence-based solutions and passways.

Methods

Study design

We conducted a scoping review to identify solutions for decreasing socioeconomic inequality in T2D. The five stages of the framework proposed by Arksey and O’Malley were used for scoping review,[17] including identifying the research question, identifying relevant studies, study selection, data collating, summarizing, and reporting results.

In this study, we used scientific articles from five databases from 2000 and later. The information extracted from 117 studies that helped answer the research questions. The solutions for decreasing socioeconomic inequalities in T2D were categorized into 12 main solutions and 63 passways.

Search strategy and selection of the literature

The search was conducted on December 29, 2021, by one of the authors (LG). The databases used were PubMed, Web of Science (WOS), Scopus, Embase, and ProQuest. The keywords (Diabetes OR NIDDM OR MODY) AND (“Socioeconomic Factor*” OR “socio-economic factor*” OR “socio-economic inequalit*” OR “socioeconomic inequalit*” OR “Social Inequalit*” OR “Healthcare Disparit*” OR “Health care disparit*” OR “Health Care Inequalit*” OR “healthcare inequality*”) were determined after an initial broad search of the literature and consultations with a librarian and an expert on literature reviews. Search strategies by databases are shown in Table 1. We decided to use a relatively narrow defined search string because the numerous irrelevant studies would outweigh the studies concerning socioeconomic inequality in the utilization of T2D services. All studies written in English language and any countries were included. We included scientific articles from 2000 and later. The inclusion and exclusion criteria and the search strategy are shown in Table 2. This table also shows that post hoc exclusion criteria were developed after a first review round and then applied in a second round. The development of such “post hoc” criteria is central to the scoping review process as it is unlikely that researchers will be able to identify parameters for exclusion at the outset.[18] Articles that were not related to the research questions, not suggested solutions for reducing inequality in T2D, or proposed solutions for general inequality were regarded as nonrelevant articles. The selection method and search flow are represented in Figure 1.

Table 1 Search strategies by databases

Database	Search strategy	Documents	Date of search	
PubMed	(Diabetes[tiab] OR NIDDM[tiab] OR MODY[tiab]) AND (“Socioeconomic Factor*”[tiab] OR “socio-economic factor*”[tiab] OR “socio-economic inequalit*”[tiab] OR “socioeconomic inequalit*”[tiab] OR “Social Inequalit*”[tiab] OR “Healthcare Disparit*”[tiab] OR “Health care disparit*”[tiab] OR “Health Care Inequalit*”[tiab] OR “healthcare inequality*”[tiab])	1190	December 29, 2021	
WOS	TS = (Diabetes OR NIDDM OR MODY) AND TS = (“Socioeconomic Factor*” OR “socio-economic factor*” OR “socio-economic inequalit*” OR “socioeconomic inequalit*” OR “Social Inequalit*” OR “Healthcare Disparit*” OR “Health care disparit*” OR “Health Care Inequalit*” OR “healthcare inequality*”)	1513	December 29, 2021	
Scopus	TITLE-ABS (Diabetes OR NIDDM OR MODY) AND TITLE-ABS(“Socioeconomic Factor*” OR “socio-economic factor*” OR “socio-economic inequalit*” OR “socioeconomic inequalit*” OR “Social Inequalit*” OR “Healthcare Disparit*” OR “Health care disparit*” OR “Health Care Inequalit*” OR “healthcare inequality*”)	1058	December 29, 2021	
Embase	(Diabetes: ti, ab OR NIDDM: ti, ab OR MODY: ti, ab) AND (“Socioeconomic Factor*”:ti, ab OR “socio-economic factor*”:ti, ab OR “socio-economic inequalit*”:ti, ab OR “socioeconomic inequalit*”:ti, ab OR “Social Inequalit*”:ti, ab OR “Healthcare Disparit*”:ti, ab OR “Health care disparit*”:ti, ab OR “Health Care Inequalit*”:ti, ab OR “healthcare inequality*”:ti,ab)	1424	December 29, 2021	
Proquest	noft((Diabetes OR NIDDM OR MODY)) AND noft((“Socioeconomic Factor*” OR “socio-economic factor*” OR “socio-economic inequalit*” OR “socioeconomic inequalit*” OR “Social Inequalit*” OR “Healthcare Disparit*” OR “Health care disparit*” OR “Health Care Inequalit*” OR “healthcare inequality*”))	2019	December 29, 2021	

Table 2 Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria	- Written in the English language	
	- Articles from 2000 and later	
	- Qualitative and quantitative studies	
Exclusion criteria	- Written in the non-English language	
	- Reports and commentaries	
	- Articles without or nonaccessible full text	

Figure 1 Flow diagram of study selection and screening

Data extraction

To organize data related to a study’s research questions a spreadsheet was created. The spreadsheet includes information about the publication information, choice situation, study sample, country, and provider type. This process was initially conducted by one of the authors (LG) and finalized by other researchers. During team meetings, the authors discussed the different factors that emerged from the literature, shared their own perspectives and interpretations, and worked together to develop an overall perspective on the key factors that related to decreasing socioeconomic inequalities in T2D. Disagreements were discussed until a consensus was reached.

Data analysis

This study used thematic analysis. To conduct thematic analysis, a guide proposed by Braun and Clarke[19] was applied. For familiarization, the text data were reviewed several times for inferring a list of inductive themes. The authors independently coded the text data collected. They read and reread the information. In the next step, primary themes were extracted from the obtained data and reviewed by the team members and initial names were assigned to the themes. The team members held a meeting to elaborate on conflicts and controversial points and reach an agreement on themes. They continued the discussion until addressing all the controversies. Then, themes and subthemes were specified. In the next step, team members reviewed, modified, and collated coded statements, finalized the names of themes and subthemes, and finally wrote the scholarly report.

Results

The solutions for decreasing socioeconomic inequalities in T2D were categorized into 12 main solutions and 63 passways, which are shown in Table 3.

Table 3 Main solutions and passways for decreasing socioeconomic inequalities in T2D

Main solutions	Passways	References	
Improving health literacy for all	Provide appropriate health information about diabetes	[1120212223242526]	
Update diabetic educational content	[1120212223242527282930313233]	
Introducing reliable sources and channels about diabetes	[3435363738394041]	
Creating a user-friendly platform for accessing diabetic content	[32424344454647]	
Develop a purposeful strategy in providing knowledge and skills based on the health literacy of target groups	[61122232425263034353738394041]	
Intersectoral educational cooperation for diabetes	[234849505152]	
Disseminate reliable diabetic content	[11202122232425]	
Resource management for health literacy in diabetes	[11202122232425]	
Environmental advertising about diabetes	[11202122293031323343495053]	
Increased public awareness of diabetes	[112122232425272829303132333435363738394041]	
Group training for society	[1120212223242527282930313233343536373839404143495053]	
Using different educational resources for the public	[11202122232425272829303132333435363738394041]	
Education through media	[11202122293031323343495053]	
Educational follow-up by phone	[343536373843495053]	
Educational booklets sent via email to individuals	[343536373843495053]	
Primary prevention	Group training for endangered people	[11202122232425293031323334353637 384350]	
Individual counseling	[202122232527293335424546495054555657585960616263][112223242931355152565758]	
Using team base and agile education model	[43495053]	
Equal policymaking for healthy foods	[253543465056]	
Encouragement to increase physical activity	[25465064]	
Training to change lifestyle	[256465]	
Efforts to food security in vulnerable people	[3449506667]	
Increase availability and proximity to health facilities	[3241424344454647]	
Secondary prevention	Implementation of community-based screening programs	[3044476869707172]	
Outcome-based treatment goals for T2D patients	[273445465055]	
Informing about the proportion and distribution of undiagnosed diabetics among socioeconomic strata	[507374757677]	
Risk-based affirmative healthcare action	[78]	
Healthcare management and control on medical services for T2D	[202122232733404950787980]	
Tertiary prevention	Prolonged follow-up on the complications of diabetes	[7880]	
Counseling for self-care management for diabetic complications	[2836818283]	
Provide rehabilitation services for vulnerable and affected diabetic patients	[344546]	
Addressing socioeconomic determinants	Paying attention to socioeconomic factors in planning	[48495079848586]	
Paying attention to socioeconomic factors in providing resources	[354777878889]	
Paying attention to socioeconomic factors in targeting services	[6576]	
Quality improvement of diabetic services	Standardization of care for T2Ds	[27435590]	
Improving assessment systems for quality care at different levels	[4246486379]	
Improving continuous surveillance systems	[30566391]	
Diabetes rapid access program	[92]	
Improvement diabetic services delivery	Providing cost-effective services	[78]	
Trying to reduce indirect costs of services delivery	[3478]	
Affordability of services	[32]	
Providing diabetic services based on demand and need in the target area	[9394]	
Financial supports	Subsidize the treatment and care of T2D	[23]	
Government subsidies for low-income households	[838595]	
Financial protection of T2D in public hospitals	[748696]	
Designing a financial supportive package for patients	[50719798]	
Increase insurance coverage	[50719698]	
Designing support programs to reduce socioeconomic inequality in disadvantaged areas	[555774757799]	
Development of digital infrastructure	Development of information infrastructure	[27435590]	
Outreach of telemedicine	[43100]	
Local digital inclusion	[101]	
Collaboration	Sustainable intersectoral collaboration	[235284]	
Holistic approach	[235284]	
Joint efforts	[484950]	
Improve comprehensive perspectives in strategies	Racial differences	[2540747880829798102103]	
Ethnic perspective	[2540747880829798102103]	
Perspective of class differences	[408298102103]	
Fender perspective	[82104]	
Age perspective	[444595]	
Service providers	Improve diabetes management skills for providers and physicians through education	[2021222327344265788090100101105]	
Financial and nonfinancial incentives for service providers	[247475106]	
University and in-service training	[346580100101105]	

Main solutions

1) Improving health literacy (HL) for all

Improving preliminary prevention for society is one of the solutions for decreasing socioeconomic inequalities in T2D. For this purpose, studies have expressed different educational and awareness-related passways across society as follows.

Provide appropriate health information on diabetes: Some studies referred to the provision of appropriate health information.[1120212223242526]

Update diabetic educational content: The results of some studies have shown that there are shortages in diabetes updated knowledge. Skillful updated knowledge to respond and educate the patient precisely as well as having sufficient knowledge, experience, and skill related to diabetes education and its complications are necessary.[1120212223242527282930313233]

Introducing reliable sources and channels about diabetes: Studies emphasized that information sources used by diabetic patients should be among the most reliable sources of health information.[3435363738394041]

Creating a user-friendly platform for accessing diabetic content: Studies have shown that providing T2D patients with online access to their needed health information can help to improve accessing to diabetes care information. This is particularly important in settings where the health information system is fragmented and distributed.[32424344454647]

Develop a purposeful strategy in providing knowledge and skills tailored to the HL of individuals: The results of research in the world suggested that providing HL should be customized for different groups in society.[61122232425263034353738394041]

Intersectoral educational cooperation for diabetes: Researchers said that intersectoral collaborative action is a beneficial and cost-effective strategy in improving health literacy, and multilevel, comprehensive literacy health interventions are increasingly used to prevent T2D.[234849505152]

Disseminate reliable diabetic content: The results of some studies confirmed that disseminating reliable diabetic content can improve HL and increase public awareness of diabetes and reduce inequality in all population strata.[11202122232425]

Resource management for HL in diabetes: It is categorized into three different sectors, including database management, record management, and data processing management in research.[11202122232425]

Environmental advertising about diabetes: Studies indicated that environmental advertising is a specific type of communication designed toward promoting social, economic, and environmental benefits of products to form responsible values and behavior of consumers. It is possible that well-devised and deployed environmental advertising can provide opportunities for healthcare providers to improve their chances of successfully engaging current and future patients, hastening exchange, and building market share.[11202122293031323343495053]

Increasing public awareness of diabetes: Studies have shown that increasing public awareness of diabetes through immediate planning and implementation of public health measures and individual interventions is an important component of preventing the occurrence and complications of T2D.[112122232425272829303132333435363738394041]

Group training for society: Some evidence revealed that group-based education programs for society might increase diabetes knowledge, self-empowerment, quality of life, and self-management skills.[1120212223242527282930313233343536373839404143495053]

Using different educational resources for the public: Educational resources in the health domain can include a wide range of learning, teaching, and research materials, such as textbooks, videos, podcasts, and online courses. In several studies mentioned that educational resources permit no cost access, reuse, repurpose, adaptation and redistribution by others.[11202122232425272829303132333435363738394041]

Education through social media: Researchers pointed out that the use of social media in public health education due to its ability to remove physical barriers that traditionally impede access to healthcare support and resources can improve the level of HL among the general public.[11202122293031323343495053]

Educational follow-up by mobile phone: The results of various studies indicated that the use of mobile applications in the health education area has the potential to improve HL outcomes.[343536373843495053]

Sending educational booklets via email: The results of various studies have shown that educational booklets sent via email to individuals are one of the ways for improving HL outcomes.[343536373843495053]

2) Primary prevention:

Primary prevention is one of the solutions for decreasing socioeconomic inequalities in T2D. We identified different passways for decreasing socioeconomic equality through primary prevention, which includes the following.

Group training for endangered people: Group training is instruction that takes place in groups of people—typically five or more. Some evidence suggested that group training for endangered people is more effective than individual training for people at risk.[11202122232425293031323334353637384350]

Individual counseling: Some studies referred to counseling approaches, whether used alone or in combination, that have the potential to facilitate positive changes in a range of health behaviors among various individuals.[202122232527293335424546495054555657585960616263]

Using team base and agile education model: The study results emphasized that moving from the traditional scripted diabetes education model to a more team-based and agile model can optimize the provision of diabetic educations for individuals with significant barriers and improve quality measures.[43495053]

Equal policymaking for healthy foods: Studies shown that evaluating innovative policy approaches to change the availability of healthy foods through incentives and taxation, or efforts to improve food through neighborhood and urban planning have been limited, and relatively scattered.[253543465056]

Encouragement to increase physical activity: The results of studies indicated that physical activity plays a major role in the development and potential prevention of T2D and diabetes complications. Policy, planning, legislative, and community-based initiatives that alter the built environment to enhance physical activity levels may play a large role in affecting diabetes risk at the individual and population levels.[25465064]

Training to change lifestyle: The results of the studies emphasized that prevention efforts for target lifestyle factors can decrease socioeconomic inequalities in T2D.[256465]

Efforts to food security in vulnerable people: Research indicated that food security exists when all people at all times have physical, social, and economic access to sufficient, safe, and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life. The four pillars of food security are as follows: food availability, access to food, utilization, and stability. The disruption of food intake or eating patterns because of a lack of money and other resources is one of the reasons for socioeconomic inequalities in T2D.[3449506667]

Increase availability and proximity to health facilities: Several studies found that increasing the availability and the proximity of health facilities could facilitate access to T2D management services for lower socioeconomic groups.[32424344454647]

3) Secondary prevention:

Secondary prevention is another solution for decreasing socioeconomic inequalities in T2D, and it is declared in different studies as follows.

Implementation of community-based screening programs: Several studies suggested that programs to improve the implementation of community-based screening programs for early detection of cases are urgently needed, especially in high-risk population subgroups.[3044476869707172]

Outcome-based treatment goals for T2D patients: Outcome-based treatment, as the name implies, is the treatment that focuses upon the desired outcome, and mentioned in several studies as a passway for decreasing socioeconomic inequalities in T2D.[273445465055]

Informing about the proportion and distribution of undiagnosed diabetics among socioeconomic strata: Studies have found that targeted strategies for screening and prevention can inform us to diagnose diabetics in terms of proportion and distribution among different T2D socioeconomic groups.[507374757677]

Risk-based affirmative healthcare action: The results of a study showed “this strategy has the potential not only to improve diabetes outcomes among all patients irrespective of SES, but simultaneously to reduce socioeconomic disparities.”[78]

Healthcare management and control on medical services for T2D: Healthcare management and control will be effective on a socioeconomic gap in healthcare systems.[202122232733404950787980]

4) Tertiary prevention:

The passways of tertiary prevention as one of the main solutions for decreasing socioeconomic inequality in T2D patients are mentioned as follows.

Prolonged follow-up on the complications of diabetes: Longer follow-up will be needed to examine the effects on disparities in diabetes outcomes that take longer to manifest. Therefore, as a passway, two studies pointed out prolonged follow-up for reducing social and economic inequality in T2D.[7880]

Counseling for self-care management for diabetic complications: Some studies pointed out that passways should be considered for designing self-management interventions in healthcare centers, particularly in socioeconomically disadvantaged settings.[2836818283]

Provide rehabilitation services for vulnerable and affected diabetic patients.[344546]

5) Addressing socioeconomic determinants:

Some studies found that if local socioeconomic determinants and especially local demographics are taken into account in the planning, and targeting the organizing of local health services, the productivity of the health system can be raised and the evidence–treatment gap could shrink geographically. For achieving these endeavors, studies mentioned passways including focusing on socioeconomic factors in planning,[48495079848586] socioeconomic factors in providing resources,[354777878889] and socioeconomic factors in targeting services.[6576]

6) Quality improvement of diabetic services:

The quality improvement of diabetic services for decreasing socioeconomic inequality in T2D patients’ passways is mentioned in studies as follows.

Standardization of care for T2Ds: The results of some studies confirmed that standardization of accepted care practices for patients with diabetes improved compliance with diabetic care bundle completion and patient outcomes in the primary care setting, and it can reduce inequality in all population strata.[27435590]

Improving assessment systems for quality care at different levels: Studies have reported that combining the regional patient database with geospatial modeling makes it possible to develop systems for the assessment of the quality of care at different levels.[4246486379]

Improving continuous surveillance systems: The findings of some studies showed that programs to improve surveillance systems for early detection of diabetes cases are urgently needed, especially in high-risk population subgroups.[30566391]

Diabetes Rapid Access Program (DRAP): The results of a cross-sectional study with the aim of improving access to healthcare providers through the medical home model showed that the DRAP—as a community base health initiative for supporting and improving the primary care infrastructure—is an effective intervention to decreasing healthcare disparities in T2D patients.[92]

7) Improvement in diabetic service delivery:

Improving the provision of services to diabetic patients is also one of the main solutions for decreasing socioeconomic inequality in diabetic patients. The passways are mentioned as follows.

Providing cost-effective services: A study found that there is an immediate need to strengthen the healthcare delivery system to generate awareness and for the prevention, early detection, and cost-effective management of patients with diabetes, with a focus on people belonging to the lower SES.[78]

Trying to reduce indirect costs of service delivery: The research results showed that affordability of services could be improved by reducing the indirect and opportunity costs of T2D-related health care with a focus on people belonging to the lower SES. Reducing disparities is important not only for social justice, but would benefit everyone by lowering costs[3478] and affordability of services.[32]

Providing diabetic services based on demand and need in the target area: Studies emphasized that targeting healthcare services based on demand and need by area, and then the use of internally valid small-area-based (individual-level and area-based SES) data can be an effective approach to improving health outcomes.[9394]

8) Financial supports:

Another main solution that various studies have pointed for decreasing T2D socioeconomic inequality is financial supports.[2552575973767779858788979899100101]

9) Development of digital infrastructure:

Trying to improve the digital infrastructure is another main solution for decreasing socioeconomic inequality of T2D, which has different passways as follows.

Development of information infrastructure: Studies showed that the percentage of undiagnosed patients with diabetes will decrease with the improvement of healthcare information infrastructure.[27435590]

Outreach of telemedicine: Studies have shown that the use of telemedicine, particularly through the outreach of media devices such as cellphones, can increase access to healthcare and help to level the playing field treatment-wise, particularly by increasing penetration of digital devices in all socioeconomic and sociocultural levels.[43100]

Local digital inclusion: It could be used for screening and helping T2D with lower SES to obtain low-cost Internet service, equipment, and basic digital skill training.[101]

10) Collaboration:

The results of the research showed that the methods to facilitate and improve collaboration also be effective for decreasing socioeconomic inequality of T2D patients, which includes various passways as follows.

Sustainable intersectoral collaboration: Studies indicated that sustainable intersectoral collaboration and partnerships among relevant public institutions, private enterprises, and civil society organizations engaged in social development and health promotion should be facilitated.[235284]

Holistic approach: Some studies emphasized that policymakers at national and local levels should adopt holistic approaches to prevent socioeconomic inequalities through additional and better-integrated resources for essential quality diabetes care in clinics.[235284]

Joint efforts: It could be attained through involving public, private, and nongovernmental organizations[48] or combined efforts from patients, family members, healthcare professionals, government, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs).[4950]

11) Improve comprehensive perspectives in strategies:

The research results showed that comprehensive perspectives involving biological and nonbiological factors in strategies have the potential not only to improve diabetes outcomes among all patients irrespective of race/ethnicity/class differences/gender differences/age differences, but simultaneously to reduce disparities.[27424647768082849799100104105106]

12) Service providers:

Different studies showed that service providers played a vital role in decreasing the socioeconomic inequality of T2D patients. Also, passways to improve the situation of service providers are mentioned as follows.

Improve diabetes management skills for providers and physicians through education.[2021222327344265788090100101105]

Financial and nonfinancial incentives for service providers: Various studies have found that policymakers should consider offering better incentives for healthcare providers to practice in rural areas.[247475106]

University and in-service training: Some studies found that revising the content of training based on the socioeconomic inequalities and community-based educational model for service provider seems very necessary to improve their skills for reducing inequality in service delivery.[346580100101105]

Discussion

In this study, we extracted solutions to reduce the socioeconomic inequality of T2D patients from the results of 117 different studies that were conducted on T2D patients.

In developing countries, studies found that most of the inequalities are caused by the lack of education and health literacy, and most of the studies emphasized the promotion of public education and the promotion of HL and increased availability and proximity to health facilities for solutions to reduce social and economic inequalities in T2D.[1112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051]

While in advanced countries, studies emphasize improving comprehensive perspectives in strategies for racial differences and the development of digital infrastructure.[8081828384858687888990919293949596979899100]

Regarding improving health literacy for all Michou et al.’s study about socioeconomic inequalities in relation to health and nutrition literacy in Greece shown that improving HL has an effect on health behaviors and outcomes and decreasing socioeconomic inequalities.[107] The study by King et al., highlights the potential of community-based approaches, particularly global youth-engaged citizen science Community-engaged Participatory Action Research (CEPAR), to address health inequities and foster environmental justice. The study showed that by harnessing diverse resident insights and perspectives, community-based approaches such as CEPAR can help to inform and drive more relevant and sustainable solutions for healthier communities both now and in the future.[108] The study by Petrovic et al. encourages the implementation of interventions targeting health behaviors, as they reduce socioeconomic inequalities in health and increase population health.[109] In the study by Larsen et al., highlighted the importance of behavioral change campaigns focused on lifestyle changes for reducing socioeconomic inequity in health outcomes.[110]

Regarding the solution of primary prevention, Lockyer and Spiro’s study highlighted the need for primary prevention policies to take into account socio-economic factors in order to address widening inequalities in rates of obesity, particularly among low-income population groups. Also, they suggested that policies enacted to improve the nutrition environment and increase opportunities for physical activity in four US sites as part of the Childhood Obesity Declines project.[111] A systematic review study about the contribution of health behaviors to socioeconomic inequalities in health by Petrovic et al. emphasized that it should be encouraged the implementation of interventions targeting health behaviors, as such interventions reduce socioeconomic inequalities in health and increase population health.[109]

According to the secondary prevention solution, a study by Feller et al., emphasized the importance of secondary prevention strategies, such as colorectal cancer (CRC) screening for reducing disparities in CRC outcomes, and also the need for public health strategies to ensure equal access to screening and optimal CRC care for all social groups and regions in Switzerland.[112]

Regarding to tertiary prevention, Hinde et al. emphasized for increasing cardiac rehabilitation uptake is cost-effective and can also be implemented to reduce known socioeconomic inequalities.[113]

According to addressing socioeconomic determinants, the study by Bilal et al. found that solutions to socioeconomic inequalities combine tailored health promotion and management interventions.[114]

Quality improvement of diabetic services is one of the main solutions, and the study by Bray et al. revealed that socioeconomic disparities in first stroke incidence reduce interventions to improve the quality of acute stroke care and address disparities in cardiovascular risk factors present before stroke.[115]

In relation to improvement diabetic services delivery, Griffith et al. found that the affordable care act reduced socioeconomic disparities in healthcare access.[116]

Financial support is another main solution that Erwin et al.’s study emphasized that identifying financial avenues, such as financial assistance programs in addition to county funds, can overcome financial barriers to improving socioeconomic inequity.[117] In Chirwa et al.’s study, the results suggest that there may be a need for the provision of more subsidies to vulnerable households.[118]

Findings by Muhammad et al. in Nigeria showed that the disparities could be reduced through free service expansion by targeting people from low SES.[119] Rocha et al. found that existing socioeconomic inequalities have affected the course of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic; thus, targeted policies and actions are needed to protect those with the greatest socioeconomic vulnerability.[120]

Wang et al., conducted a study in China. The study aimed to reduce inequity in catastrophic health expenditure through the reform of integrating health insurance. They found that more targeted solutions are needed to achieve enhanced equity, particularly for the most vulnerable populations. The study suggested that promoting more precise insurance intervention for the most vulnerable population, such as low-income households and those with chronic diseases, can help to reduce inequity in catastrophic health expenditure. The study also highlights the importance of comprehensive strategies, such as favorable targeted benefits packages or job creation, for addressing health inequities among the disadvantaged groups.[121] In a study by Homaie Rad et al., highlighted economic inequalities in dental care utilization in Iran and suggested that increasing the coverage of dental insurance can be a solution to decrease inequality in dental care utilization.[122] Moor et al. emphasized that strategies for reducing inequalities in self-rated health should focus on material or structural living conditions as they shape conditions of psychosocial resources and health behavior.[123]

In emphasizing the development of digital infrastructure as a solution for decreasing socioeconomic inequalities, Jaffe et al. revealed that the use of remote healthcare services, or telehealth, in the COVID-19 pandemic is a promising solution for providing health care to those unable to access care in person easily and thus helping to reduce health inequalities.[124] The study by Qureshi et al. offered ways in which socioeconomic inequities can be overcome through mobile health applications, which show ways of addressing the digital divide and poverty mapping and how digital startups and the use of mobile phones empower entrepreneurs.[125]

Regarding collaboration, Garzón Orjuela et al., in a study emphasized that the importance of collaboration as the main solution for reducing health inequalities and highlighted that strategies to reduce health inequalities must be intersectoral and multidisciplinary in nature, involving all sectors of the health system. It is essential to continue generating interventions focused on strengthening health systems to achieve adequate universal health coverage, with a process of comprehensive and quality care.[126]

Also about improve comprehensive perspectives in strategies, in a study by Lindley et al. emphasized that the impact of socioeconomic determinants of health on cardiovascular outcomes in women and suggested that optimizing care access via policy change and improving physical access to care can help to mitigate these barriers, particularly for women with geographic or transportation limitations. Addressing structural racism through policy change and bolstering structured community support systems will be key to reducing adverse cardiovascular outcomes among women of racial and ethnic minorities.[127]

In addition, a study by Balan et al, revealed that racial disparities in colorectal cancer for black patients, which have led to a significant mortality difference compared to white patients, and suggested that systemic racial inequities in insurance, socioeconomic status, and healthcare resources are contributing factors. Disparities impact nearly every point along the colorectal cancer care continuum and include barriers to screening, surgical care, oncologic care, and surveillance. Healthcare systems should strive to correct these disparities through both cultural competency at the provider level and public policy change at the national level.[128] The study by Machón et al. indicated that there are socioeconomic inequalities in health among the elderly population. The increase in educational level and the maintenance of sufficient pensions can be key policies that contribute to the reduction in inequalities in this population group.[129]

Consistent with the solution of service providers, the study in China referred to increasing incentives for providers can decrease socioeconomic inequalities in inefficiencies, poor quality, and unaffordable health care.[130]

Limitations

One of the inclusion criteria was the articles in English language, so those articles in non-English language were not reviewed. Also, the full text of a limited number of articles was not accessible and consequently excluded from this study.

Conclusions

In general, reducing the factors affecting the creation of socioeconomic inequality in T2D patients can also apply to closing health inequalities in other diseases. In particular, applying identified solutions in diabetes policies and interventions would be recommended for decreasing socioeconomic inequalities in T2D. Also, the passways could be addressed as entry points to help better implementation of diabetic policies. As identified solutions and passways are related to all health and non-health sectors and authorities, intersectoral collaboration should be considered in diabetes policies to reduce socioeconomic inequalities in T2D, more successfully.

Ethics approval

This study received the required ethics approval from the Research Ethics Committee of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran with ethics code: IR.MUI.NUREMA.REC.1401.033.

Authors’ Contributions

LG contributed in concept, study selection and screening and wrote the manuscript draft; MAR contributed to the development of the study protocol, abstracted and analyzed the articles, and critically revised the manuscript; AT conceived of the study, participated in its design and contributed in analyzing the articles. SK developed the original idea and analyzed data. All authors read and approved the final article.

Financial support and sponsorship

This study was funded by Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran, as a PhD thesis with research code no.: 3400867.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.
==== Refs
1 GBD 2017 Disease and Injury Incidence and Prevalence Collaborators Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 354 diseases and injuries for 195 countries and territories, 1990-2017: A systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2017 Lancet 2018 392 1789 858 30496104
2 World Health Organization. The top 10 causes of death Accessible at: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/the-top-10-causes-of-death
3 Qiao J Lin X Wu Y Huang X Pan X Xu J Global burden of non-communicable diseases attributable to dietary risks in 1990-2019 J Hum Nutr Diet 2022 35 202 13 33834556
4 Tatulashvili S Fagherazzi G Dow C Cohen R Fosse S Bihan H Socioeconomic inequalities and type 2 diabetes complications: A systematic review Diabetes Metab 2020 46 89 99 31759171
5 Sun H Saeedi P Karuranga S Pinkepank M Ogurtsova K Duncan BB IDF Diabetes Atlas: Global, regional and country-level diabetes prevalence estimates for 2021 and projections for 2045 Diabetes research and clinical practice 2022 183 109119 34879977
6 Safieddine B Sperlich S Beller J Lange K Epping J Tetzlaff J Socioeconomic inequalities in type 2 diabetes in employed individuals, nonworking spouses and pensioners SSM Popul Health 2020 11 100596 32462074
7 Agardh E Allebeck P Hallqvist J Moradi T Sidorchuk A Type 2 diabetes incidence and socio-economic position: A systematic review and meta-analysis Int J Epidemiol 2011 40 804 18 21335614
8 Kim SH Lee SY Kim CW Suh YJ Hong S Ahn SH Impact of socioeconomic status on health behaviors, metabolic control, and chronic complications in type 2 diabetes mellitus Diabetes Metab J 2018 42 380 93 30113143
9 Rawshani A Svensson AM Zethelius B Eliasson B Rosengren A Gudbjörnsdottir S Association between socioeconomic status and mortality, cardiovascular disease, and cancer in patients with type 2 diabetes JAMA Intern Med 2016 176 1146 54 27367969
10 Al-Rubeaan KA Al-Manaa HA Khoja TA Al-Sharqawi AH Aburisheh KH Youssef AM Health care services provided to type 1 and type 2 diabetic patients in Saudi Arabia Saudi Med J 2015 36 1216 25 26446334
11 Krishnan P Nagarajan S Socio-Economic Factors Influencing the Diabetic Patients Choice of Healthcare Services in Vellore, Tamil Nadu Int J Cur Res Rev 2021 13 46 50
12 Ali MK McKeever Bullard K Imperatore G Benoit SR Rolka DB Albright AL Reach and use of diabetes prevention services in the United States, 2016-2017 JAMA Netw Open 2019 2 e193160 31074808
13 Canedo JR Miller ST Schlundt D Fadden MK Sanderson M Racial/ethnic disparities in diabetes quality of care: The role of healthcare access and socioeconomic status J Racial Ethn Health Disparities 2018 5 7 14 28078660
14 Gregg EW Hora I Benoit SR Resurgence in diabetes-related complications JAMA 2019 321 1867 8 30985875
15 Saydah S Lochner K Socioeconomic status and risk of diabetes-related mortality in the US Public Health Rep 2010 125 377 88 20433032
16 Hill-Briggs F Adler NE Berkowitz SA Chin MH Gary-Webb TL Navas-Acien A Social determinants of health and diabetes: A scientific review Diabetes Care 2020 44 258 79 33139407
17 Arksey H O'Malley L Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework International Journal of Social Research Methodology 2005 8 19 32
18 Crooks VA Kingsbury P Snyder J Johnston R What is known about the patient's experience of medical tourism? a scoping review BMC Health Serv Res 2010 10 266 20825667
19 Braun V Clarke V Using thematic analysis in psychology Qualitative Research in Psychology 2006 3 77 101
20 Wang Z Li X Chen M Socioeconomic factors and inequality in the prevalence and treatment of diabetes among middle-aged and elderly adults in China J Diabetes Res 2018 2018 1471808
21 Le C Rong S Dingyun Y Wenlong C Socioeconomic disparities in type 2 diabetes mellitus prevalence and self-management behaviors in rural southwest China Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2016 121 9 16 27620854
22 Chatzi G Mason T Chandola T Whittaker W Howarth E Cotterill S Sociodemographic disparities in non-diabetic hyperglycaemia and the transition to type 2 diabetes: Evidence from the English longitudinal study of ageing Diabet Med 2020 37 1536 44 32531074
23 Baruah MP Pathak A Kalra S Das AK Zargar AH Bajaj S A revisit to prevailing care and challenges of managing diabetes in India: Focus on regional disparities Indian J Endocrinol Metab 2014 18 254 63 24944916
24 Piper CN Polite-Middleton T Chalakalal S Sebastion N Martin F Race, socioeconomic status, and rurality influences on type 2 diabetes management among north Carolina adults Ethn Dis 2015 25 46 51 25812251
25 Katzmarzyk PT Staiano AE New race and ethnicity standards: Elucidating health disparities in diabetes BMC Med 2012 10 42 22546706
26 Attridge M Creamer J Ramsden M Cannings-John R Hawthorne K Culturally appropriate health education for people in ethnic minority groups with type 2 diabetes mellitus Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014 CD006424
27 Burge MR Lucero S Rassam AG Schade DS What are the barriers to medical care for patients with newly diagnosed diabetes mellitus? Diabetes Obes Metab 2000 2 351 4 11225964
28 Garn SD Glümer C Villadsen SF Malling GMH Christensen U Understanding the mechanisms generating outcomes in a Danish peer support intervention for socially vulnerable people with type 2-diabetes: A realist evaluation Arch Public Health 2021 79 160 34488884
29 Wu H Jackson CA Wild SH Jian W Dong J Gasevic D Socioeconomic status and self-reported, screen-detected and total diabetes prevalence in Chinese men and women in 2011-2012: A nationwide cross-sectional study J Glob Health 2018 8 020501 30140436
30 Asadi-Lari M Khosravi A Nedjat S Mansournia MA Majdzadeh R Mohammad K Socioeconomic status and prevalence of self-reported diabetes among adults in Tehran: Results from a large population-based cross-sectional study (Urban HEART-2) J Endocrinol Invest 2016 39 515 22 26359145
31 Sortsø C Lauridsen J Emneus M Green A Jensen PB Socioeconomic inequality of diabetes patients'health care utilization in denmark Health Econ Rev 2017 7 21 28550486
32 Mulyanto J Kringos DS Kunst AE Socioeconomic inequalities in the utilisation of hypertension and type 2 diabetes management services in Indonesia Trop Med Int Health 2019 24 1301 10 31465584
33 Shrivastava U Misra A Gupta R Viswanathan V Socioeconomic factors relating to diabetes and its management in India J Diabetes 2016 8 12 23 26019052
34 Berkowitz SA Karter AJ Lyles CR Liu JY Schillinger D Adler NE Low socioeconomic status is associated with increased risk for hypoglycemia in diabetes patients: The diabetes study of Northern California (DISTANCE) J Health Care Poor Underserved 2014 25 478 90 24858863
35 De Silva AP De Silva SHP Haniffa R Liyanage IK Jayasinghe S Katulanda P Inequalities in the prevalence of diabetes mellitus and its risk factors in Sri Lanka: A lower middle income country Int J Equity Health 2018 17 45 29665834
36 White RO Beech BM Miller S Health care disparities and diabetes care: Practical considerations for primary care providers Clin Diabetes 2009 27 105 12 21289869
37 Santos J Kislaya I Antunes L Santos AJ Rodrigues APP Neto M [Diabetes: Socioeconomic inequalities in the Portuguese Population in 2014] Acta Med Port 2017 30 561 67 28926330
38 Liu M Wang J He Y Jiang B Wu L Wang Y Awareness, treatment and control of type 2 diabetes among chinese elderly and its changing trend for past decade BMC Public Health 2016 16 278 26987372
39 Al-Hanawi MK Chirwa GC Pulok MH Socio-economic inequalities in diabetes prevalence in the kingdom of Saudi Arabia Int J Health Plann Manage 2020 35 233 46 31460681
40 Taylor YJ Spencer MD Mahabaleshwarkar R Ludden T Racial/ethnic differences in healthcare use among patients with uncontrolled and controlled diabetes Ethn Health 2019 24 245 56 28393538
41 Renfrew MR Taing E Cohen MJ Betancourt JR Pasinski R Green AR Barriers to care for Cambodian patients with diabetes: Results from a qualitative study J Health Care Poor Underserved 2013 24 633 55 23728033
42 Espelt A Borrell C Roskam AJ Rodríguez-Sanz M Stirbu I Dalmau-Bueno A Socioeconomic inequalities in diabetes mellitus across Europe at the beginning of the 21st century Diabetologia 2008 51 1971 9 18779946
43 Barnard-Kelly KD Cherñavvsky D Social inequality and diabetes: A commentary Diabetes Ther 2020 11 803 11 32124269
44 Aekplakorn W Chariyalertsak S Kessomboon P Assanangkornchai S Taneepanichskul S Putwatana P Prevalence of diabetes and relationship with socioeconomic status in the Thai population: National health examination survey, 2004-2014 J Diabetes Res 2018 2018 1654530
45 Ryvicker M Sridharan S Neighborhood environment and disparities in health care access among urban Medicare beneficiaries with diabetes: A retrospective cohort study Inquiry 2018 55 46958018771414
46 Denova-Gutiérrez E Vargas-Chanes D Hernández S Muñoz-Aguirre P Napier D Barquera S Linking socioeconomic inequalities and type 2 diabetes through obesity and lifestyle factors among Mexican adults: A structural equations modeling approach Salud Publica Mex 2020 62 192 202 32237562
47 Moradi G Majdzadeh R Mohammad K Malekafzali H Jafari S Holakouie-Naieni K Is the status of diabetes socioeconomic inequality changing in Kurdistan province, West of Iran? a comparison of two surveys Med J Islam Repub Iran 2016 30 375 27493919
48 Tørslev MK Andersen PT Nielsen AV Petri M Termansen T Vardinghus-Nielsen H Tingbjerg changing diabetes: A protocol for a long-term Supersetting initiative to promote health and prevent type 2 diabetes among people living in an ethnically and socioeconomically diverse neighbourhood in Copenhagen, Denmark BMJ Open 2021 11 e048846
49 Siegel KR Gregg EW Duru OK Shi L Mangione CM Thornton PL Time to start addressing (and not just describing) the social determinants of diabetes: Results from the Next-D 2.0 network BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care 2021 9 Suppl 1 e002524
50 Øversveen E Stratified users and technologies of empowerment: Theorising social inequalities in the use and perception of diabetes self-management technologies Sociol Health Illn 2020 42 862 76 32072666
51 Li CY Chuang YC Chen PC Chen MS Lee MC Ku LE Social determinants of diabetes-related preventable hospitalization in Taiwan: A spatial analysis Int J Environ Res Public Health 2021 18 2146 33671762
52 Ali N Akram R Sheikh N Sarker AR Sultana M Sex-specific prevalence, inequality and associated predictors of hypertension, diabetes, and comorbidity among Bangladeshi adults: Results from a nationwide cross-sectional demographic and health survey BMJ Open 2019 9 e029364
53 Martens TW Lima JS Johnson EA Conry JA Hoppe JJ Bergenstal RM Trial of a new diabetes education model: Closing the gap in health disparity for people with diabetes J Diabetes Sci Technol 2021 15 568 74 33759587
54 Lee TC Glynn RJ Peña JM Paynter NP Conen D Ridker PM Socioeconomic status and incident type 2 diabetes mellitus: Data from the women's health study PLoS One 2011 6 e27670 22194788
55 Bachmann MO Eachus J Hopper CD Davey Smith G Propper C Pearson NJ Socio-economic inequalities in diabetes complications, control, attitudes and health service use: A cross-sectional study Diabet Med 2003 20 921 9 14632718
56 Chang J Guy MC Rosales C de Zapien JG Staten LK Fernandez ML Investigating social ecological contributors to diabetes within Hispanics in an underserved U.S. -Mexico border community Int J Environ Res Public Health 2013 10 3217 32 23912202
57 Fuller D Neudorf J Lockhart S Plante C Roberts H Bandara T Individual- and area-level socioeconomic inequalities in diabetes mellitus in Saskatchewan between 2007 and 2012: A cross-sectional analysis CMAJ Open 2019 7 E33 9
58 Tapager I Olsen KR Vrangbæk K Exploring equity in accessing diabetes management treatment: A healthcare gap analysis Soc Sci Med 2022 292 114550 34837828
59 Kapur A Economic analysis of diabetes care Indian J Med Res 2007 125 473 82 17496369
60 Jacobs E Tönnies T Rathmann W Brinks R Hoyer A Association between regional deprivation and type 2 diabetes incidence in Germany BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care 2019 7 e000857
61 Towne SD Bolin J Ferdinand A Nicklett EJ Smith ML Ory MG Assessing diabetes and factors associated with foregoing medical care among persons with diabetes: Disparities facing American Indian/Alaska native, black, hispanic, low income, and southern adults in the U. S. (2011-2015) Int J Environ Res Public Health 2017 14 464 28445431
62 Maier W Scheidt-Nave C Holle R Kroll LE Lampert T Du Y Area level deprivation is an independent determinant of prevalent type 2 diabetes and obesity at the national level in Germany Results from the national telephone health interview surveys ‘German Health Update’ GEDA 2009 and 2010 PLoS One 2014 9 e89661
63 Maggini M Minardi V Possenti V Bertozzi N Carrozzi G Sampaolo L Socioeconomic inequalities in the prevalence of diabetes in Italy. InDIABETOLOGIA 233 SPRING ST, NEW YORK, NY 10013 USA: SPRINGER 2012 55 S134 5
64 Lieb DC Snow RE DeBoer MD Socioeconomic factors in the development of childhood obesity and diabetes Clin Sports Med 2009 28 349 78 19505621
65 Andersen MB Bjørkman AD Pedersen M Ekholm O Molsted S Social inequality in lifestyle, motivation to change lifestyle and received health advice in individuals with diabetes: A nationwide study Scand J Public Health 2020 48 847 54 31808737
66 Ortiz MS Cabieses B Repetto P Type 2 diabetes in young people: Adding socioeconomic inequality to the discussion Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2019 156 107795 31369763
67 Smalls BL Gregory CM Zoller JS Egede LE Assessing the relationship between neighborhood factors and diabetes related health outcomes and self-care behaviors BMC Health Serv Res 2015 15 445 26428459
68 Hasan MM Tasnim F Tariqujjaman M Ahmed S Socioeconomic inequalities of undiagnosed diabetes in a resource-poor setting: Insights from the cross-sectional Bangladesh demographic and health survey 2011 Int J Environ Res Public Health 2019 16 115 30609855
69 Thomas C Nightingale CM Donin AS Rudnicka AR Owen CG Sattar N Socio-economic position and type 2 diabetes risk factors: Patterns in UK children of South Asian, Black African-Caribbean and White European Origin PLoS One 2012 7 e32619 22412897
70 Lee HW Song M Yang JJ Kang D Determinants of poor self-rated health in Korean adults with diabetes J Prev Med Public Health 2015 48 287 300 26639743
71 Beltrán-Sánchez H Drumond-Andrade FC Riosmena F Contribution of socioeconomic factors and health care access to the awareness and treatment of diabetes and hypertension among older Mexican adults Salud Publica Mex 2015 57 Suppl 1 S6 14 26172227
72 Stringhini S Tabak AG Akbaraly TN Sabia S Shipley MJ Marmot MG Contribution of modifiable risk factors to social inequalities in type 2 diabetes: Prospective Whitehall II cohort study BMJ 2012 345 e5452 22915665
73 Ruiz PL Hopstock LA Eggen AE Njølstad I Grimnes G Stene LC Undiagnosed diabetes based on HbA(1c) by socioeconomic status and healthcare consumption in the Tromsøstudy 1994-2016 BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care 2021 9 e002423
74 Catherine JP Russell MV Peter CH The impact of race and socioeconomic factors on paediatric diabetes EClinicalMedicine 2021 42 101186 34805811
75 Olsen KR Laudicella M Health care inequality in free access health systems: The impact of non-pecuniary incentives on diabetic patients in Danish general practices Soc Sci Med 2019 230 174 83 31026740
76 Owens MD Beckles GL Ho KK Gorrell P Brady J Kaftarian JS Women with diagnosed diabetes across the life stages: Underuse of recommended preventive care services J Womens Health (Larchmt) 2008 17 1415 23 18954234
77 Grundmann N Mielck A Siegel M Maier W Area deprivation and the prevalence of type 2 diabetes and obesity: Analysis at the municipality level in Germany BMC Public Health 2014 14 1264 25495106
78 Calman NS Hauser D Schussler L Crump C A risk-based intervention approach to eliminate diabetes health disparities Prim Health Care Res Dev 2018 19 518 22 29415785
79 Sikiö M Tykkyläinen M Tirkkonen H Kekäläinen P Dunbar J Laatikainen T Type 2 diabetes care in north Karelia Finland: Do area-level socio-economic factors affect processes and outcomes? Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2014 106 496 503 25451893
80 Chandler RF Monnat SM Racial/ethnic differences in use of health care services for diabetes management Health Educ Behav 2015 42 783 92 25842386
81 Aweko J De Man J Absetz P Östenson CG Swartling Peterson S Mölsted Alvesson H Patient and provider dilemmas of type 2 diabetes self-management: A qualitative study in socioeconomically disadvantaged communities in Stockholm Int J Environ Res Public Health 2018 15 1810 30135373
82 Correa-de-Araujo R McDermott K Moy E Gender differences across racial and ethnic groups in the quality of care for diabetes Womens Health Issues 2006 16 56 65 16638522
83 O'Neil A Williams ED Browne JL Horne R Pouwer F Speight J Associations between economic hardship and markers of self-management in adults with type 2 diabetes: Results from diabetes miles-Australia Aust N Z J Public Health 2014 38 466 72 24750399
84 Li CY Chuang YC Chen PC Chen MS Lee MC Ku LE Social determinants of diabetes-related preventable hospitalization in Taiwan: A spatial analysis Int J Environ Res Public Health 2021 18 2146 33671762
85 Deladoëy J Henderson M Geoffroy L Linear association between household income and metabolic control in children with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus despite free access to health care J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2013 98 E882 5 23539732
86 Mutyambizi C Pavlova M Hongoro C Booysen F Groot W Incidence, socio-economic inequalities and determinants of catastrophic health expenditure and impoverishment for diabetes care in south Africa: A study at two public hospitals in Tshwane Int J Equity Health 2019 18 73 31118033
87 Kolling M Winkley K von Deden M “for someone who's rich, it's not a problem”. Insights from Tanzania on diabetes health-seeking and medical pluralism among Dar es salaam's urban poor Global Health 2010 6 8 20441575
88 Hwang J Decomposing socioeconomic inequalities in the use of preventive eye screening services among individuals with diabetes in Korea Int J Public Health 2016 61 613 20 26979304
89 Qi Y Koster A van Boxtel M Köhler S Schram M Schaper N Adulthood socioeconomic position and type 2 diabetes mellitus-a comparison of education, occupation, income, and material deprivation: The Maastricht study Int J Environ Res Public Health 2019 16 1435 31018480
90 Druică E Goschin Z Băicuş C Regional socio-economic factors influencing diabetes incidence: The case of Romania Eastern Journal of European Studies 2018 9 87 109
91 Hwang J Rudnisky C Bowen S Johnson JA Measuring socioeconomic inequalities in eye care services among patients with diabetes in Alberta, Canada, 1995-2009 Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2017 127 205 11 28391137
92 Lee K Palacio C Alexandraki I Stewart E Mooradian AD Increasing access to health care providers through medical home model may abolish racial disparity in diabetes care: Evidence from a cross-sectional study J Natl Med Assoc 2011 103 250 6 21671528
93 Toivakka M Pihlapuro A Tykkyläinen M Mehtätalo L Laatikainen T The usefulness of small-area-based socioeconomic characteristics in assessing the treatment outcomes of type 2 diabetes patients: A register-based mixed-effect study BMC Public Health 2018 18 1258 30428885
94 Gudlavalleti MV John N Allagh K Sagar J Kamalakannan S Ramachandra SS Access to health care and employment status of people with disabilities in South India, the side (South India Disability Evidence) study BMC Public Health 2014 14 1125 25361570
95 Hwang J Rudnisky C Bowen S Johnson JA Income-related inequalities in visual impairment and eye screening services in patients with type 2 diabetes J Public Health (Oxf) 2016 38 e571 9 28158837
96 Piroozi B Mohamadi-Bolbanabad A Moradi G Safari H Ghafoori S Zarezade Y Incidence and intensity of catastrophic health-care expenditure for type 2 diabetes mellitus care in Iran: Determinants and inequality Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes 2020 13 2865 76 32922053
97 Angier H Ezekiel-Herrera D Marino M Hoopes M Jacobs EA DeVoe JE Racial/ethnic disparities in health insurance and differences in visit type for a population of patients with diabetes after Medicaid expansion J Health Care Poor Underserved 2019 30 116 30
98 Marcondes FO Cheng D Alegria M Haas JS Are racial/ethnic minorities recently diagnosed with diabetes less likely than white individuals to receive guideline-directed diabetes preventive care? BMC Health Serv Res 2021 21 1150 34689778
99 Espelt A Kunst AE Palència L Gnavi R Borrell C Twenty years of socio-economic inequalities in type 2 diabetes mellitus prevalence in Spain, 1987-2006 Eur J Public Health 2012 22 765 71 22037802
100 Taylor YJ Davis ME Mohanan S Robertson S Robinson MD Awareness of racial disparities in diabetes among primary care residents and preparedness to discuss disparities with patients J Racial Ethn Health Disparities 2019 6 237 44 30039500
101 Sheon AR Bolen SD Callahan B Shick S Perzynski AT Addressing disparities in diabetes management through novel approaches to encourage technology adoption and use JMIR Diabetes 2017 2 e16 30291090
102 Dagogo-Jack S Ethnic disparities in type 2 diabetes: Pathophysiology and implications for prevention and management J Natl Med Assoc 2003 95 774 779-89 14527045
103 Chan KS Gaskin DJ Dinwiddie GY McCleary R Do diabetic patients living in racially segregated neighborhoods experience different access and quality of care? Med Care 2012 50 692 9 22525608
104 Chung GK Lai FTT Yeoh EK Chung RY Gender-specific trends of educational inequality in diagnosed diabetes from 1999 to 2014 in Hong Kong: A serial cross-sectional study of 97,481 community-dwelling Chinese adults Popul Health Metr 2021 19 37 34629087
105 Thorlby R Jorgensen S Ayanian JZ Sequist TD Clinicians' views of an intervention to reduce racial disparities in diabetes outcomes J Natl Med Assoc 2011 103 968 77 22364067
106 Shekelle PG Socioeconomic inequalities in indicator scores for diabetes: Poor quality or poor measures? BMJ 2004 329 1269 70 15548560
107 Michou M Panagiotakos DB Lionis C Costarelli V Socioeconomic inequalities in relation to health and nutrition literacy in Greece Int J Food Sci Nutr 2019 70 1007 13 30935258
108 King AC Odunitan-Wayas FA Chaudhury M Rubio MA Baiocchi M Kolbe-Alexander T Community-based approaches to reducing health inequities and fostering environmental justice through global youth-engaged citizen science Int J Environ Res Public Health 2021 18 892 33494135
109 Petrovic D de Mestral C Bochud M Bartley M Kivimäki M Vineis P The contribution of health behaviors to socioeconomic inequalities in health: A systematic review Prev Med 2018 113 15 31 29752959
110 Larsen IK Myklebust TÅ Babigumira R Vinberg E Møller B Ursin G Education, income and risk of cancer: Results from a Norwegian registry-based study Acta Oncol 2020 59 1300 7 32924698
111 Lockyer S Spiro A Socio-economic inequalities in childhood obesity: Can community level interventions help to reduce the gap?: Wiley Online Library 2019 44 381 93
112 Feller A Schmidlin K Bordoni A Bouchardy C Bulliard JL Camey B Socioeconomic and demographic inequalities in stage at diagnosis and survival among colorectal cancer patients: Evidence from a Swiss population-based study Cancer Med 2018 7 1498 510 29479854
113 Hinde S Bojke L Harrison A Doherty P Improving cardiac rehabilitation uptake: Potential health gains by socioeconomic status Eur J Prev Cardiol 2019 26 1816 23 31067128
114 Bilal U Cainzos-Achirica M Cleries M Santaeugènia S Corbella X Comin-Colet J Socioeconomic status, life expectancy and mortality in a universal healthcare setting: An individual-level analysis of >6 million Catalan residents Prev Med 2019 123 91 4 30853378
115 Bray BD Paley L Hoffman A James M Gompertz P Wolfe CDA Socioeconomic disparities in first stroke incidence, quality of care, and survival: A nationwide registry-based cohort study of 44 million adults in England Lancet Public Health 2018 3 e185 93 29550372
116 Griffith K Evans L Bor J The affordable care act reduced socioeconomic disparities in health care access Health Aff (Millwood) 2017 10.1377/hlthaff.2017.0083
117 Erwin DJ LaMaire C Espana A Eble TN Dhar SU Financial barriers in a county genetics clinic: Problems and solutions J Genet Couns 2020 29 678 88 32275337
118 Chirwa GC Suhrcke M Moreno-Serra R Socioeconomic inequality in premiums for a community-based health insurance scheme in Rwanda Health Policy Plan 2021 36 14 25 33263730
119 Muhammad FM Majdzadeh R Nedjat S Sajadi HS Parsaeian M Socioeconomic inequality in intermittent preventive treatment using sulphadoxine pyrimethamine among pregnant women in Nigeria BMC Public Health 2020 20 1860 33276756
120 Rocha R Atun R Massuda A Rache B Spinola P Nunes L Effect of socioeconomic inequalities and vulnerabilities on health-system preparedness and response to covid-19 in Brazil: A comprehensive analysis Lancet Glob Health 2021 9 e782 92 33857500
121 Wang J Zhu H Liu H Wu K Zhang X Zhao M Can the reform of integrating health insurance reduce inequity in catastrophic health expenditure? evidence from China Int J Equity Health 2020 19 49 32245473
122 Homaie Rad E Kavosi Z Arefnezhad M Economic inequalities in dental care utilizations in Iran: Evidence from an urban region Med J Islam Repub Iran 2016 30 383 27493927
123 Moor I Spallek J Richter M Explaining socioeconomic inequalities in self-rated health: A systematic review of the relative contribution of material, psychosocial and behavioural factors J Epidemiol Community Health 2017 71 565 75 27682963
124 Jaffe DH Lee L Huynh S Haskell TP Health inequalities in the use of telehealth in the united states in the lens of COVID-19 Popul Health Manag 2020 23 368 77 32816644
125 Qureshi S Pandemics within the pandemic: Confronting socio-economic inequities in a datafied world Information Technology for Development 2021 27 151 70
126 Garzón-Orjuela N Samacá-Samacá DF Luque Angulo SC Mendes Abdala CV Reveiz L Eslava-Schmalbach J An overview of reviews on strategies to reduce health inequalities Int J Equity Health 2020 19 192 33115482
127 Lindley KJ Aggarwal NR Briller JE Davis MB Douglass P Epps KC Socioeconomic determinants of health and cardiovascular outcomes in women: Jacc review topic of the week J Am Coll Cardiol 2021 78 1919 29 34736568
128 Balan N Petrie BA Chen KT Racial disparities in colorectal cancer care for black patients: Barriers and solutions Am Surg 2022 88 2823 30 35757937
129 Machón M Mosquera I Larrañaga I Martín U Vergara I Socioeconomic inequalities in health among the elderly population in Spain Gaceta Sanitaria 2019 34 276 88 31563284
130 Yip WC Hsiao W Meng Q Chen W Sun X Realignment of incentives for health-care providers in China The Lancet 2010 375 1120 30
