# Purpose in Life and Estimated Type 2 Diabetes Risk: Cross-Sectional Associations Across Three Validated Risk Scores in 93,077 Spanish Working Adults

## TL;DR

People with low life purpose are more likely to have higher diabetes risk based on three screening tools, suggesting psychosocial factors may help assess health risks.

## Contribution

This study is the first to link Purpose in Life with diabetes risk using three validated prediction tools in a large working adult population.

## Key findings

- Low Purpose in Life was associated with higher diabetes risk across all three risk scores.
- Odds of high diabetes risk were 2.38–2.79 times higher for those with low life purpose.
- Associations were consistent across genders and lifestyle factors.

## Abstract

Background: Psychosocial well-being has been increasingly recognized as a relevant factor in cardiometabolic health; however, evidence linking Purpose in Life with type 2 diabetes risk across validated prediction tools remains limited. This study examined the association between Purpose in Life and estimated diabetes risk using three established risk scores. Methods: A cross-sectional analysis was performed in 93,077 Spanish working adults aged 18–69 years participating in routine occupational health assessments. Purpose in Life was measured with the 10-item Purpose in Life scale and categorized into high, moderate, and low levels. Estimated type 2 diabetes risk was evaluated using QDScore, FINDRISC, and CANRISK. Multivariable logistic regression models were applied to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), adjusting for age, sex, occupational social class, smoking status, dietary pattern, physical activity, and body mass index. Results: Lower levels of Purpose in Life were consistently associated with greater likelihood of high estimated diabetes risk across all three instruments. Compared with participants reporting high Purpose in Life, those with low Purpose in Life showed increased odds of high-risk classification for QDScore (OR 2.38; 95% CI 2.19–2.57), FINDRISC (OR 2.49; 95% CI 2.08–2.89), and CANRISK (OR 2.79; 95% CI 2.50–3.09). Clear dose–response patterns were observed across Purpose in Life categories, and associations were similar in men and women as well as across lifestyle strata. Conclusions: Reduced Purpose in Life is strongly associated with higher estimated type 2 diabetes risk across multiple validated screening tools. Although causal direction cannot be inferred from this cross-sectional design, these findings suggest that psychosocial dimensions may provide complementary information for cardiometabolic risk assessment and prevention strategies.