Young people with type 1 diabetes mellitus: Attitudes, perceptions, and experiences of diabetes management and continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE, AIMS, AND OBJECTIVES: Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII; insulin pump) use is increasing. However, there is little information about how this technology is used compared with other insulin delivery methods (ie, injections) by young people with type 1 diabetes mellitus in Australia. This study explored young people's attitudes, perceptions, and experiences with diabetes management comparing those using with those not using CSII, and proportions likely to transition to adult services requiring initiation and/or support for CSII use. METHODS: A survey was undertaken of young people (aged 12 to 18 years) with type 1 diabetes mellitus and their parents/guardians living in Hunter New England, Australia, using a questionnaire designed to collect quantitative, descriptive, and demographic data. Most questions were based on previously developed and validated instruments. In total, 107 respondents returned partially or fully completed questionnaires. RESULTS: Respondents had positive attitudes and perceptions of their self-efficacy and diabetes management, but were moderately disturbed by their diabetes and reported experiencing suboptimal management outcomes. Patterns of associations were demonstrated between knowledge, attitudes, and experiences of diabetes modeled by regression analysis. There were no statistically significant differences in responses between users and nonusers of CSII. Over 40% indicated their intention to use the technology as adults. CONCLUSIONS: Opportunities for enhanced diabetes service support were clear, and CSII did not appear to be used to its full potential. Service redesign could enhance support for this young population using all preferred insulin delivery methods and should align to patients' goals and preferences to maximize service and patient gain.
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 | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".