MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3008095232 · doi:10.2337/db19-852-p

852-P: Reduction in Emotional Burden in Type 2 Diabetes Is Associated with Improved Medication Adherence: Results from COMRADE

2019· article· en· W3008095232 on OpenAlexaff
Doyle M. Cummings, Mackenzie Brown, Lesley D. Lutes, Bertha Hambidge, MARISSA CARRAWAY, Shivajirao P. Patil, Alyssa Adams, Kerry Littlewood, Sheila Edwards, Peggy Gatlin

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Disease Management Strategies
Canadian institutionsKelowna General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineType 2 diabetesDiabetes mellitusPsychological interventionDistressRandomized controlled trialInternal medicinePhysical therapyProspective cohort studyClinical psychologyPsychiatryEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The presence of distress symptoms in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes (T2D) negatively influences diabetes management behaviors (DMB) and increases the risk of co-morbid complications. Cognitive behavioral interventions (CBI) are successful at reducing these symptoms, but the role of reducing Emotional Burden (EB) on diabetes behaviors is poorly understood. A prospective randomized trial involving 139 patients (mean age = 52.6 +/- 9.5 years; 27% black; 78% female; BMI = 37.0 +/- 9.0) with uncontrolled T2D (mean A1c = 9.6 +/-2) compared the effectiveness of a 16-week severity-tailored CBI plus lifestyle coaching (n=67; IG=intervention group) to usual care (n=72; CG=control group) on reducing EB and its impact on DMB such as self-care behaviors and medication adherence. Trained staff at a rural primary care clinic measured EB (subscore of Diabetes Distress Scale-17), self-care behaviors (Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities, SDSCA), and medication adherence (ModMAS) at baseline and 12-months follow-up using validated instruments. There were no differences between groups at baseline in mean age, race, or gender. The average reduction in EB, average improvement in ModMAS, and average improvement in self-care (SDSCA) were all significantly greater in the IG (-1.00 +/- 1.17; +1.0 ± 2.0; +1.1 ± 1.3) than in the CG (-.06 +/- 1.38; + 0.17 ± 1.9; +0.58 ± 1.4) (p=0.0001; p = 0.02; p = 0.027, respectively). Mean improvement in ModMAS was significantly and progressively related to improvements in EB in the IG (worse/same EB = -0.25 ±0.96; moderately improved EB = +0.79 ± 1.9; markedly improved EB = +1.6 ± 2.2; p = 0.045). A linear regression model showed that EB remained significantly associated with ModMAS even when controlling for age, race, and treatment group (β = -0.55; 95% CI: -0.8 to -0.3; p = 0.0001). A severity-tailored CBI plus lifestyle coaching significantly improves EB in T2D patients which is associated with significantly improved medication adherence. Disclosure D.M. Cummings: None. M. Brown: None. L. Lutes: None. B. Hambidge: None. M.A. Carraway: None. S.P. Patil: Research Support; Self; Novo Nordisk Inc. A. Adams: None. K. Littlewood: None. S.B. Edwards: None. P. Gatlin: None. Funding Bristol-Myers Squibb Foundation

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.248 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetesSame topicChronic Disease Management StrategiesFrench-language works237,207