Anxious Temperament and Disease Progression at Diagnosis: The Case of Type 2 Diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between anxious temperament and disease progression at diagnosis for individuals with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). METHODS: A sample of 204 individuals, newly diagnosed with T2DM, completed the Behavioral Inhibition and Activation Scales (BIS/BAS) and provided an A1C reading. Regression analyses were used to predict A1C levels from individual differences in BIS and BAS. RESULTS: Individual differences in BIS were inversely related to A1C at diagnosis in the sample as a whole, and this association remained strong after controlling for demographic variables and body mass index. Most importantly, temperamentally anxious individuals had low A1C levels at diagnosis in all age groups, in contrast to their nonanxious counterparts who showed increasing A1C at diagnosis as a function of decreasing age. BAS scores were unrelated to A1C. CONCLUSIONS: Although older age is generally associated with lower disease progression at diagnosis, high BIS individuals show uniformly lower disease progression across all age groups. High levels of temperamental anxiety may facilitate early diagnosis of T2DM, particularly among younger individuals who are not subject to routine screening.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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".