Population health
Primary sources, stated plainly, with the cohort and the caveats attached.
Most Indian health statistics circulate as a single number in a headline, detached from the study that produced it. These pages put each figure back with its source: which cohort was surveyed, what was measured, what the number does and does not support. Every statistic here traces to a named primary study — ICMR-INDIAB in The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology, the GBD India cardiovascular analysis in The Lancet Global Health, and an NFHS-4 analysis in BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care — and links to it directly. The recurring finding across all three is the same: metabolic and cardiovascular disease in India is more prevalent, arrives earlier, and goes undetected more often than the screening infrastructure assumes.
15.3% — The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology, 2023
81.2% — The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology, 2023
53.4% — The Lancet Global Health, 2018
ICMR-INDIAB is the largest nationally representative survey of metabolic disease in India, conducted by the Indian Council of Medical Research across every state and union territory and published in The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology in 2023. It is the source for the diabetes, prediabetes, dyslipidaemia, hypertension and abdominal obesity prevalence figures used throughout this site.
The GBD India cardiovascular analysis, published in The Lancet Global Health in 2018 by the India State-Level Disease Burden Initiative, is the source for the age distribution of cardiovascular deaths and for the change in cardiovascular share of mortality between 1990 and 2016.
The NFHS-4 analysis published in BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care in 2020 is the source for awareness — the proportion of Indians with elevated blood sugar who did not know it. NFHS-4 is a household survey, so its awareness data reflects self-report against measured values, which is exactly what makes it useful for this question.
A prevalence figure describes a sampled population at a point in time, not an individual’s risk. That 81.2% of adults sampled had dyslipidaemia does not mean any particular person has an eight-in-ten chance of it — sampling design, age structure and regional variation all matter, and the underlying papers state their limitations. Where a figure here is drawn from a subgroup or an urban-weighted sample, the page says so.
The recurring pattern across all three studies is worth stating plainly, because it is the finding rather than any single number: metabolic and cardiovascular disease in India is more prevalent than screening infrastructure assumes, arrives earlier in life than Western risk models predict, and goes undetected in a large share of those affected.
These pages are written to be quoted. Every figure carries its source and year, and each links to the primary study rather than to a secondary write-up. If you are a journalist or researcher and need clarification on how a number has been framed here, write to hello@peakbrain.health.
The programme
Peak Brain draws a full blood and urine panel at your home, has a licensed physician read every marker together rather than one at a time, and turns what they find into a ranked 90-day protocol with a retest at the end.