Association of depression with treatment outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A cross-sectional study from Karachi, Pakistan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To assess the associations of depression with glycemic control and compliance to self-care activities in adult patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted at a tertiary-care hospital in Karachi (Aga Khan University Hospital). Equal numbers of depressed and non-depressed patients were consecutively recruited from the diabetic clinic. Information on demographic and clinical characteristics was collected in face-to-face interviews and from medical records. Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS) was used to measure depression. Associations of depressed status (HADS ≥ 8) with poor glycemic control (Hemoglobin A1c level ≥ 7%) and compliance to self-care activities were assessed by logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: A total of 286 patients were included in this study with a male-female ratio of 1.2:1. Mean age was 52 years and in 64.7% of them, the duration of diabetes was more than 3 years. Depressed patients were more likely to be female (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 1.88; 95% confidence interval [95%CI] = 1.07-3.31), had a family history of diabetes (OR = 2.64; 95%CI = 1.26-5.55), and poor glycemic control (OR = 5.57; 95%CI = 2.88-10.76) compared with non-depressed patients. Depression was also associated with low compliance to self-care activities such as taking dose as advised (OR = 0.32; 95%CI = 0.14-0.73), dietary restrictions (OR = 0.45; 95%CI = 0.26-0.79) and foot care (OR = 0.38; 95%CI = 0.18-0.83). CONCLUSIONS: Adult patients with Type 2 Diabetes who have depression were more likely to have poor glycemic control and lower compliance to self-care activities, and they might need particular attention during follow-up visits.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".