Does Personality and Anxiety Symptomatology Matter in the Diabetes Mellitus Treatment Adherence? A Cross-Sectional Study Among Women with Diabetes Mellitus.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Purpose: Anxiety is prevalent among women with diabetes mellitus. Women also tend to have higher levels of neuroticism and anxiety. These symptoms can have an impact on social functioning and diabetes care. The main aim of the present study was to determine the relationship between neuroticism and anxiety symptoms, and other clinical and psychosocial variables, among women with diabetes mellitus (DM). Patients and methods: This was a cross-sectional study conducted on women with diabetes mellitus. Sociodemographic and clinical variables were acquired, including perceptions on religious practice, social support, and diabetic self-care. Study subjects completed the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item (GAD-7) and the Big-Five Inventory (BFI). The neuroticism subscale of the BFI was used for analysis. Results: The study included 141 subjects (Median age: 64.0 years, IQR: 52.5–71.0 years) with a median duration of diabetes of 12.0 years (IQR: 6.0–20.0 years). Neuroticism scores correlated positively with the GAD-7 scores (Spearman’s rho: 0.406; p<0.001). In the bivariate analysis, neuroticism also had significant association with employment status (p=0.023), religious practice (p=0.006), perceived social support (p=0.001), and perceived ability of diabetic self-management (p<0.001). In the regression analysis, after controlling for employment, religious practice, and social support, neuroticism remained associated with anxiety (p<0.001) and diabetic self-management (p=0.001). Conclusions: Neuroticism was related to poorer subjective sense of diabetic management and a greater level of anxiety among women with DM. Improving self-efficacy in managing diabetes may help patients coping up with anxiety symptoms among those with neuroticism traits. This may also contribute to a better understanding of features and effective treatment of women with DM.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".