MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4226329037 · doi:10.1097/xce.0000000000000262

Living with diabetes and its impact on mental health: results of an online survey

2022· article· en· W4226329037 sur OpenAlexaff
Mike Stedman, Saydah Eltom, Emma Solomon, Rustam Rea, Katherine Grady, Nadia Chaudhury, Stephen Brown, Angela Paisley, Roger Gadsby, Adrian Heald

Notice bibliographique

RevueCardiovascular Endocrinology & Metabolism · 2022
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueDiabetes Management and Education
Établissements canadiensHealth Sciences Centre
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésDistressMedicineMental healthMoodDiabetes mellitusGerontologyDepression (economics)Quality of life (healthcare)Type 2 diabetesFamily medicinePsychiatryClinical psychologyNursing

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

People with diabetes often experience low mood. There is considerable evidence for diabetes reducing the quality of life (QOL) and mental health [1–3]. The underlying factors that might contribute to this are less well understood and were explored in this recent study. We conducted an online survey of people with diabetes, who had agreed to be involved through the research for the future (RfTF) project, in relation to their lived experience of the condition [4]. PHQ-9 (depression) [5], Diabetes Distress Screening Scale (DDSS) [6] and EQ5D5L QOL [7] questionnaires were completed by 130 people with diabetes and their clinical records were also examined. The aim of the study was to determine the prevalence of low mood and reported distress in people with diabetes. Ethical approval was obtained from the Greater Manchester West Research Ethics Committee: REC reference: 20/LO/0738 specifically citing RfTF as a recruiting ‘venue’. RfTF is an National Health Service-supported organization that encourages people to become more involved with health research in their local area. The RfTF database as an National Institute for Health Research resource is deemed to be broadly representative of people with diabetes living in England. Of the 130 people who responded (22% response rate), 45 had type 1 diabetes and 85 had type 2 diabetes (T2DM). A total of 56% were women and 44% were men. The majority of participants were under primary care. The median age was 59 [interquartlie range (IQR), 47–67] years. Overall median scores were: EQ5D5L 0.74 (IQR, 0.64–0.85) (lower than the UK population median score of 82.8), DDSS 1.9 (IQR, 1.3–2.7) (≥2 indicates moderate distress) and PHQ-9 5 (IQR, 2–11) (≥5 indicates depression). Worse scores reflecting higher diabetes distress (DDSS), lower QOL EQ5D5L and higher depression (PHQ-9) were linked to female sex, younger age, less years after initial diagnosis and obesity. The 30% of people with a history of prescribed antidepressant medication in the previous 12 months also showed worse scores (47% higher than those with no antidepressant use history). The DDSS score elevation came from increases in emotional burden and regimen related distress. Score variances were not linked to diabetes type, prescription of insulin or the change in blood glucose control over the last three HbA1c measurements. Clinically significant depression has been reported in up to one of every four people with T2DM [8]. The results of our study should be placed in the context of this and similar observations. We accept that our sample was self-selected so any findings should be treated with caution. However, we feel that the greater impact of diabetes on mental health apparent in younger women and in people with a shorter duration of diabetes and those with a BMI of at least 30 are relevant. We suggest that these factors be considered when planning psychosocial interventions and behavior change messaging to support people with diabetes, in relation to the multiple challenges that they face, particularly given the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on routine care for people with diabetes in the UK and elsewhere [4]. Acknowledgements Conflicts of interest There are no conflicts of interest.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,628
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,690

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,033
Tête enseignante GPT0,299
Écart entre enseignants0,266 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2022
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCardiovascular Endocrinology & MetabolismMême sujetDiabetes Management and EducationTravaux en français237 207