Submitted:
05 January 2026
Posted:
07 January 2026
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Background: Diabetes among adults is becoming a major public health crisis in the United States. Numerous authors have documented the rising prevalence of diabetes, with notable variations found within the United States at the census level, state, and county levels. Yet, there is a need to understand whether diabetes prevalence varies between urban centers within a particular state. Methods: This ecological study provides a longitudinal investigation of the prevalence of adult diabetes across five major metropolitan urban areas in Texas (Austin, Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston, and San Antonio) from 2011 to 2023. By utilizing data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) and statistical testing, we evaluate both the temporal trajectory and city-level geographic disparities of diabetes prevalence. Findings: Upon aggregating all five urban centers, the findings demonstrate a significant statewide increase (β=0.12, P=0.026) in diabetes prevalence over the thirteen-year study period. Furthermore, profound regional variations were observed, with San Antonio having a significantly (P<0.05) higher prevalence than Austin, Dallas, and Fort Worth, with the San Antonio area exhibiting the highest mean prevalence at 12.1% and the Austin area maintaining the lowest at 9%. Interpretation: This research emphasizes the necessity for synchronized public health policies that account for localized contexts while addressing the broader metabolic crisis facing the Texas urban corridor.
Keywords:
Research in Context
Evidence Before This Study
Added Value of This Study
Implications of All the Available Evidence
Introduction
Methods
Results
Discussion
Funding
Contributor
Data sharing statement
Declaration of interests
References
- Yang M, Wang T. Neighborhood walkability and cardiometabolic disease in Texas. Sci Rep. 2025 Mar 19;15:9488.
- Gaskin DJ, Thorpe RJ, McGinty EE, Bower K, Rohde C, Young JH, et al. Disparities in diabetes: the nexus of race, poverty, and place. Am J Public Health. 2014 Nov;104(11):2147–55.
- Jones CI. The Past and Future of Economic Growth: A Semi-Endogenous Perspective. Annu Rev Econ. 2022 Aug 12;14(Volume 14, 2022):125–52.
- Fisher-Hoch SP, Vatcheva KP, Rahbar MH, McCormick JB. Undiagnosed Diabetes and Pre-Diabetes in Health Disparities. PLOS ONE. 2015 July 17;10(7):e0133135.
- Benoit SR, Hora I, Albright AL, Gregg EW. New directions in incidence and prevalence of diagnosed diabetes in the USA. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2019 May 28;7(1):e000657.
- Mier N, Medina AA, Ory MG. Mexican Americans With Type 2 Diabetes: Perspectives on Definitions, Motivators, and Programs of Physical Activity [Internet]. Vol. 4. 2007 [cited 2025 Dec 25]. Available from: https://stacks.cdc.gov.
- van den Berg A, Nielsen A, Akhavan N, Pulido CL, Basu S, Hussaini A, et al. Design and evaluation of a coalition-led obesity initiative to promote healthy eating and physical activity in low-income, ethnically diverse communities: the Go! Austin/Vamos! Austin initiative. Arch Public Health. 2019 May 29;77(1):25.
- Jiao J. Measuring Vulnerable Population’s Healthy and Unhealthy Food Access in Austin, Texas. AIMS Public Health. 2016 Sept 12;3(4):722–32.
- Cunningham SA, Patel SA, Beckles GL, Geiss LS, Mehta N, Xie H, et al. County-level contextual factors associated with diabetes incidence in the United States. Ann Epidemiol. 2018 Jan;28(1):20-25.e2.
- Laflamme DM, VanDerslice JA. Using the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) for Exposure Tracking: Experiences from Washington State. Environ Health Perspect. 2004 Oct;112(14):1428–33.
- Tukey JW. Comparing Individual Means in the Analysis of Variance. Biometrics. 1949;5(2):99–114.
- Gaskin DJ, Thorpe RJ, McGinty EE, Bower K, Rohde C, Young JH, et al. Disparities in diabetes: the nexus of race, poverty, and place. Am J Public Health. 2014 Nov;104(11):2147–55.
- Lorenzo C, Serrano-Rios M, Martinez-Larrad MT, Gabriel R, Williams K, Gonzalez-Villalpando C, et al. Was the Historic Contribution of Spain to the Mexican Gene Pool Partially Responsible for the Higher Prevalence of Type 2 Diabetes in Mexican-Origin Populations?: The Spanish Insulin Resistance Study Group, the San Antonio Heart Study, and the Mexico City Diabetes Study. Diabetes Care. 2001 Dec 1;24(12):2059–64.
- Haffner SM. Epidemiology of Type 2 Diabetes: Risk Factors. Diabetes Care. 1998 Dec 1;21(Supplement_3):C3–6.
- Menke A, Casagrande S, Geiss L, Cowie CC. Prevalence of and Trends in Diabetes Among Adults in the United States, 1988-2012. JAMA. 2015 Sept 8;314(10):1021–9.
- Siddiqui NJ, Morriss S. Moving Upstream to Achieve Better and Equitable Health in Texas.
- Muller M, Tagtow A, Roberts SL, MacDougall E. Aligning Food Systems Policies to Advance Public Health. J Hunger Environ Nutr. 2009 July;4(3–4):225–40.
- Sreedhara M, Goulding M, Valentine Goins K, Frisard C, Lemon SC. Healthy Eating and Physical Activity Policy, Systems, and Environmental Strategies: A Content Analysis of Community Health Improvement Plans. Front Public Health [Internet]. 2020 Dec 18 [cited 2025 Dec 25];8. Available from: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/public-health/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2020.580175/full.
- Ramirez AG, Thompson IM, Vela L, editors. The South Texas Health Status Review: A Health Disparities Roadmap [Internet]. Cham (CH): Springer; 2013 [cited 2025 Dec 25]. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK543609/.
- Ekren E, Maleki S, Curran C, Watkins C, Villagran MM. Health differences between rural and non-rural Texas counties based on 2023 County Health Rankings. BMC Health Serv Res. 2025 Jan 2;25:2.
- St.Clair P, Gaudette É, Zhao H, Tysinger B, Seyedin R, Goldman DP. Using Self-Reports or Claims to Assess Disease Prevalence: It’s Complicated. Med Care. 2017 Aug;55(8):782–8.


| Area Comparisons | Contrast | 95% CI | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dallas vs Austin | 0.78 | -0.65 to 2.21 | 0.55 |
| Fort Worth vs Austin | 1.57 | 0.13 to 3.0 | 0.025 |
| Houston vs Austin | 2.15 | 0.72 to 3.59 | 0.001 |
| San Antonio vs Austin | 3.05 | 1.62 to 4.49 | <0.001 |
| Fort Worth vs Dallas | 0.79 | -0.64 to 2.23 | 0.53 |
| Houston vs Dallas | 1.38 | -0.06 to 2.81 | 0.066 |
| San Antonio vs Dallas | 2.28 | 0.84 to 3.71 | <0.001 |
| Houston vs Fort Worth | 0.58 | -0.85 to 2.02 | 0.78 |
| San Antonio vs Fort Worth | 1.48 | 0.05 to 2.92 | 0.039 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2026 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).