“Miscarried helping” in adults with Type 2 diabetes: Helping for Health Inventory—Couples.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Family-partner support has been associated with better blood glucose control, self-care adherence, and quality of life in adult patients with Type 2 diabetes (T2D). "Miscarried helping" has described interactions between youth with chronic diseases and their family members, in which a family member is helpful, but efforts are perceived as negative by the patient. Miscarried helping has not, however, been measured in adults with diabetes, which was the purpose of our study. METHOD: Data from a randomized clinical trial (n = 268) were analyzed to establish the psychometric properties and correlates of an adaptation of a measure of miscarried helping developed in pediatric populations, for use with adults with T2D. RESULTS: The Helping for Health Inventory-Couples Version (HHI-C) was found to have three underlying factors and demonstrated adequate internal consistency across time (α at baseline = .86, 4 months = .87, 8 months = .86, and 12 months = .83) and showed high test-retest reliability (p < .01) over a 12-month period. Convergent validity was partially supported, because baseline HHI-C was positively associated with maladaptive conflict resolution strategies (p = .03) and negatively associated with adaptive conflict resolution strategies (p = .04) and diabetes knowledge (p < .01). The HHI-C did not correlate with body mass index or hemoglobin A1c, a measure of glycemic control. The HHI-C was positively associated with diabetes distress (p < .01) and depressive symptoms (p = .01). DISCUSSION: This study is the 1st known reporting of the psychometric properties of a measure of miscarried helping for adults with T2D. This valid measure of miscarried helping could be useful in future studies evaluating novel, relationship-based approaches to assist adults with T2D in disease management. (PsycINFO Database Record
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".