Randomized Trial of a Tailored Cognitive Behavioral Intervention in Type 2 Diabetes With Comorbid Depressive and/or Regimen-Related Distress Symptoms: 12-Month Outcomes From COMRADE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This study evaluated the effect of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) plus lifestyle counseling in primary care on hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) in rural adult patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and comorbid depressive or regimen-related distress (RRD) symptoms. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS This study was a randomized controlled trial of a 16-session severity-tailored CBT plus lifestyle counseling intervention compared with usual care. Outcomes included changes in HbA1c, RRD, depressive symptoms, self-care behaviors, and medication adherence across 12 months. RESULTS Patients included 139 diverse, rural adults (mean age 52.6 ± 9.5 years; 72% black; BMI 37.0 ± 9.0 kg/m2) with T2D (mean HbA1c 9.6% [81 mmol/mol] ± 2.0%) and comorbid depressive or distress symptoms. Using intent-to-treat analyses, patients in the intervention experienced marginally significant improvements in HbA1c (−0.92 ± 1.81 vs. −0.31 ± 2.04; P = 0.06) compared with usual care. However, intervention patients experienced significantly greater improvements in RRD (−1.12 ± 1.05 vs. −0.31 ± 1.22; P = 0.001), depressive symptoms (−3.39 ± 5.00 vs. −0.90 ± 6.17; P = 0.01), self-care behaviors (1.10 ± 1.30 vs. 0.58 ± 1.45; P = 0.03), and medication adherence (1.00 ± 2.0 vs. 0.17 ± 1.0; P = 0.02) versus usual care. Improvement in HbA1c correlated with improvement in RRD (r = 0.3; P = 0.0001) and adherence (r = −0.23; P = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS Tailored CBT with lifestyle counseling improves behavioral outcomes and may improve HbA1c in rural patients with T2D and comorbid depressive and/or RRD symptoms.
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) | 0.001 | 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".