Correlates of psychological outcomes among family members of people with diabetes in the second Diabetes Attitudes, Wishes and Needs (<scp>DAWN</scp>2<sup>™</sup>) study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To conduct a second Diabetes Attitudes, Wishes and Needs (DAWN2(™) ) study, examining the experiences of family members caring for adults with diabetes in order to identify correlates of family member psychological outcomes (generic psychological well-being, perceived quality of life, and diabetes-related burden, impact and distress). METHODS: A total of 2057 family members living with a person with diabetes and involved in their care participated in an online, telephone or in-person survey. Samples of 120 respondents were recruited in each of 17 countries. Significant (P < 0.05) correlates of psychological outcomes were identified by multi-level multiple regression. RESULTS: Outcomes were worse for family members not working because of diabetes or those who had other competing obligations. Outcomes were worse if the person with diabetes was not a partner or parent, used injected diabetes medication, or had more frequent hypoglycaemia. Outcomes were worse for family members who believed that diabetes was more severe, were more involved in diabetes care, had more conflict over diabetes care or were frustrated about not knowing how to help the person with diabetes. Outcomes were better for those who had greater support from others and felt they found good ways to help the person with diabetes. There were significant differences in outcomes among countries before and after adjustment for individual characteristics, and correlates of outcomes varied by country. CONCLUSIONS: Several modifiable risk and protective factors for family member psychological outcomes were identified in this study. Diabetes education and social support were associated with improved outcomes, especially if they were helpful in supporting people with diabetes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".