Comment on “Prevalence of Diabetes Mellitus and Hypertension Among COVID‐19 Patients: A Cross‐Sectional Study Exploring Associations With Sociodemographic and Biological Factors in Rajshahi Division, Bangladesh”
Arooba Khan, Rafia Raza, Muddassir Khalid, Fred Segawa

Abstract
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
- —The authors received no specific funding for this work.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies · Diverse Scientific Research Studies · Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Dear Editor,
We commend the recently published article titled “Prevalence of Diabetes Mellitus and Hypertension Among COVID‐19 Patients: A Cross‐Sectional Study Exploring Associations With Sociodemographic and Biological Factors in Rajshahi Division, Bangladesh” in Health Science Reports (2025) [1]. I would like to commend the authors for their significant work, particularly relevant for low‐resource settings, which provides valuable insights into a public health issue. However, I would like to respectfully highlight several methodological concerns that could greatly affect the interpretation and relevance of the findings.
Firstly, the use of a cross‐sectional study design limits the ability to deduce significant relationships between COVID‐19 infection and the proximity of comorbidities such as diabetes mellitus and hypertension. Although correlations can be seen, some interpretations in the article are suggestive of directional effects that remain unsupported by the design employed [2].
Secondly, the sample strategy of sourcing through student networks and social media platforms carries a significant risk of selection bias. This non‐randomized sampling reduces the applicability of the results and may not accurately represent the larger group of COVID‐19 patients in the Rajshahi division or the country at large [3].
Thirdly, the classification of diabetes and hypertension was superficial. As the study categorizes participants merely as diabetic or nondiabetic, and by grouping all elevated blood pressure patients into a single category, this study neglects clinically important subgroups such as prediabetes or stages of hypertension. It may lead to loss of relevant information and also limit the accuracy of the findings [4].
Lastly, there appears to be some ambiguity in the inclusion criteria. The manuscript states that participants had diabetes mellitus, hypertension, or both, which indicates that all subjects were comorbid. However, regardless of comorbidity status, prevalence rates of these conditions are reported as if the full sample included all COVID‐19 patients. This discrepancy makes it difficult to determine the actual composition of the study population and, hence, could surely weaken the credibility of the prevalence estimates presented [5].
In conclusion, these limitations should be considered to avoid overinterpretation. Hence, future research on this topic would benefit from longitudinal designs, representative sampling approaches, more subtle variable classification, and clearer criteria for participant inclusion.
Author Contributions
Arooba Khan: conceptualization, methodology, writing – original draft. Rafia Raza: conceptualization, methodology, writing – original draft. Muddassir Khalid: conceptualization, writing – review and editing, supervision, resources. Fred Segawa: writing – review and editing, validation.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Authorship Confirmation
All authors meet the ICMJE authorship criteria and have approved the final version of the manuscript.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1A. M. Munam and A. Hossain , “Prevalence of Diabetes Mellitus and Hypertension Among COVID‐19 Patients: A Cross‐Sectional Study Exploring Associations With Sociodemographic and Biological Factors in Rajshahi Division, Bangladesh,” Health Science Reports 8, no. 8 (August 2025): e 71183, 10.1002/hsr 2.71183.40843391 PMC 12364995 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 2M. Setia , “Methodology Series Module 3: Cross‐Sectional Studies,” Indian Journal of Dermatology 61, no. 3 (May/June 2016): 261–264, 10.4103/0019-5154.182410.27293245 PMC 4885177 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 3Q. Oudat and T. Bakas , “Merits and Pitfalls of Social Media as a Platform for Recruitment of Study Participants,” Journal of Medical Internet Research 25 (October 2023): e 47705, 10.2196/47705.37819692 PMC 10600643 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 4P. Royston , D. G. Altman , and W. Sauerbrei , “Dichotomizing Continuous Predictors in Multiple Regression: A Bad Idea,” Statistics in Medicine 25, no. 1 (January 2006): 127–141, 10.1002/sim.2331.16217841 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 5J. S. Miranda , L. P. F. Abbade , J. F. Abbade , et al., “Deficiencies in Reporting Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria and Characteristics of Patients in Randomized Controlled Trials of Therapeutic Interventions in Pressure Injuries: A Systematic Methodological Review,” International Wound Journal 21, no. 2 (October 2023): e 14351, 10.1111/iwj.14351.37904609 PMC 10824623 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
