Aim: This study was performed to compare the prevalence of the metabolic syndrome (MES) according to the International Diabetes Federation (IDF) and Adult Treatment Panel III (ATPIII) definitions in a population-based sample and to determine the concordance of the definitions. Materials and Methods: A total of 244 adults aged >=20 years (145 women and 99 men), selected systematically from household registration cards in a rural village in West Anatolia, were analyzed. Kappa test was done to examine the agreement between the definitions. Results: The mean age of the group was 46.9 ± 14.9 years. The prevalence of MES using ATPIII and IDF definitions was 38.1% and 41.4%, respectively. MES prevalence increased with age 50 in both genders using both criteria (P < 0.001). Only 9.8% and 6.3% of the population had none of the components of MES according to ATPIII and IDF, respectively. The agreement rate between the IDF and ATPIII was 91.1% ± 0.04% (Kappa = 0.812). The subjects defined only with ATPIII and not IDF were all men and had lower body mass index and waist circumference than those defined by both ATPIII and IDF. Conclusions: The MES was common among our population using either ATPIII or IDF definition. The agreement between the two definitions was good. The insufficiency of IDF definition for detecting leaner but metabolically abnormal men should be kept in mind. Screening, prevention and treatment interventions for this syndrome seem to be organized promptly.

Aim: This study was performed to compare the prevalence of the metabolic syndrome (MES) according to the International Diabetes Federation (IDF) and Adult Treatment Panel III (ATPIII) definitions in a population-based sample and to determine the concordance of the definitions. Materials and Methods: A total of 244 adults aged >=20 years (145 women and 99 men), selected systematically from household registration cards in a rural village in West Anatolia, were analyzed. Kappa test was done to examine the agreement between the definitions. Results: The mean age of the group was 46.9 ± 14.9 years. The prevalence of MES using ATPIII and IDF definitions was 38.1% and 41.4%, respectively. MES prevalence increased with age 50 in both genders using both criteria (P < 0.001). Only 9.8% and 6.3% of the population had none of the components of MES according to ATPIII and IDF, respectively. The agreement rate between the IDF and ATPIII was 91.1% ± 0.04% (Kappa = 0.812). The subjects defined only with ATPIII and not IDF were all men and had lower body mass index and waist circumference than those defined by both ATPIII and IDF. Conclusions: The MES was common among our population using either ATPIII or IDF definition. The agreement between the two definitions was good. The insufficiency of IDF definition for detecting leaner but metabolically abnormal men should be kept in mind. Screening, prevention and treatment interventions for this syndrome seem to be organized promptly.