Cyclical relationship between depressive symptoms and diabetes distress in people with Type 2 diabetes mellitus: results from the Montreal Evaluation of Diabetes Treatment Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To determine if longitudinal cyclical relationships exist between depressive symptoms and diabetes distress in people with Type 2 diabetes mellitus. METHODS: Data were obtained from the Montreal Evaluation of Diabetes Treatment study, a cohort study of 1691 people with Type 2 diabetes mellitus. Depressive symptoms and diabetes distress, measured with the Patient Health Questionnaire and Diabetes Distress Scale, respectively, were assessed at baseline, 1 year and 2 years. A cross-lagged path model analysis with all autoregressive associations was used. Paths and indirect associations were examined. RESULTS: All paths in the model were significant. Depressive symptoms were positively associated with diabetes distress across consecutive time points and diabetes distress was positively associated with depressive symptoms across consecutive time points. The association between depressive symptoms at baseline and depressive symptoms at 2 years was mediated by both depressive symptoms and diabetes distress at 1 year. The association between diabetes distress at baseline and diabetes distress at 2 years was also mediated by both depressive symptoms and diabetes distress. CONCLUSIONS: Depressive symptoms and diabetes distress are cyclically related; results suggest that depressive symptoms influence diabetes distress, which, in turn, influences depressive symptoms. Although many studies focus on the differences between depressive symptoms and diabetes distress, the present study is the first to provide longitudinal evidence that these constructs are cyclically related.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".