Depression, disturbed eating behavior, and metabolic control in teenage girls with type 1 diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Depression and disturbed eating behavior (DEB) are more common in girls with type 1 diabetes (T1D) than in the general population, and may negatively affect metabolic control. OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship among depression, DEB, and metabolic control in teenage girls with T1D. METHODS: Metabolic control, body mass index and interview-ascertained symptoms of depression, and DEB were assessed twice in 98 girls with T1D, 9-14 y at baseline and 5 yr later at 14-18 yr. RESULTS: At year 5, 12.2% of girls reported current depressive symptoms, 49.0% reported current DEB, and 13.3% had a full or subthreshold eating disorder (ED). Eating Disorder Examination score was higher in girls with depression (1.4 ± 1.3 vs. 0.5 ± 0.7; p = 0.03), and 75.0% of girls with depression also endorsed DEB vs. 45.3% of girls without depression (p = 0.05). Girls with an ED were at high risk for depressive symptoms; 69.2% reported depressive symptoms vs. 22.0% of girls with no DEB (p = 0.004). Metabolic control was not significantly associated with either depression or DEB in this cohort. A regression model using baseline and year 5 depression and DEB to predict year 5 hemoglobin A1c was not significant overall. CONCLUSIONS: Depression and DEB were common and frequently concurrent in this cohort. It was encouraging that poor metabolic control was not yet strongly associated with either depression or DEB. Early detection and treatment may help to prevent the development of entrenched difficulties in this triad of mood, eating behavior, and metabolic control in a vulnerable population.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".