Assessment of Diabetes Knowledge Using the Michigan Brief Diabetes Knowledge Test Among Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) represents a growing health threat globally. The International Diabetes Federation (IDF) estimated that 387 million adults had diabetes in 2014, and this number is expected to continue to grow. In Saudi Arabia, the prevalence of T2DM over time has increased. Diabetes knowledge has been shown to improve self-management skills and glycemic control. The primary goal of this study was to assess diabetes knowledge and its impact on diabetes control and complications. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study at King Abdulaziz Specialist Hospital, Taif City, Saudi Arabia, Division of Endocrinology. T2DM patients older than 18 years who underwent a routine visit to the endocrine clinic between June and October 2014 were asked to participate. Baseline characteristics and measurement were obtained at the time of visit. Laboratory data were collected from the patients’ medical records. We excluded patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). We used the Michigan Brief Diabetes Knowledge Test to assess patients’ knowledge. Those patients who answered ? 65% of the questions were considered to possess good knowledge about diabetes. Results: A total of 264 patients participated; 131 (49.6%) were male and 132 (50.0%) were female. Approximately, half of the patients (44.7%) had had diabetes for at least 10 years, and 29.8% of patients had had the disease for 5 - 10 years. The cohort’s mean A1c was 8.56% and mean body mass index was 30.5%. Sixty-four percent of patients had only a high school education or less, and 38% had at least a college degree. Approximately, half of the cohort (41.7%) were considered to be low income, 37.9% were on oral medications only, and 41.3% were on insulin. The mean fraction of correctly answered knowledge questions was 48.26%. Twenty-eight percent of the participants thought that A1c reflected blood glucose control over the past week, and 44.3% did not know what A1c was. Approximately, one-third of patients (29.5%) believed that diet soda could be used to treat low blood glucose. Fifty-seven patients (21.6%) were considered to have good knowledge about diabetes. Conclusion: The majority (78.4%) of the screened T2DM patients had poor knowledge about diabetes. Poor knowledge was associated with higher A1c, a non-significant increase in the majority of measured cardiovascular markers, and less awareness of diabetes-related complications. J Endocrinol Metab. 2017;7(6):185-189 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jem473w
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».