55-OR: Diabetes Distress among Persons Living with Latent Autoimmune Diabetes of Adults in the Canadian Cohort BETTER—A Cross-Sectional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Latent autoimmune diabetes of adults (LADA) is known for a slowly progressive autoimmune destruction of beta-cells compared to type 1 diabetes while sharing clinical features with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes distress has not been assessed specifically in persons living with LADA (PwLADA) to address potential gaps in their care. Objective: Assess diabetes distress experienced by PwLADA and compare it to persons living with type 1 diabetes (PwT1D). Methods: Cross-sectional analysis of Diabetes Distress Scale DDS-17 filled online in the Canadian BETTER registry; Data was analyzed for 2877 participants; 266 (9%) LADA and 2611 (91%) T1D. A total distress score was calculated then items were organized and scored under four categories: emotional burden, physician distress, regimen distress and interpersonal distress. Scores were classified as low, moderate or high distress, mean item score ≥ 3 as “high distress”; chi-square was used for comparison with T1D. Results: PwLADA vs PwT1D were 50 ± 13 y.o. vs 40 ± 16 y.o (p<0.001); 67% vs. 64% females (p 0.4); diabetes duration 10 ± 9 vs. 22 ± 15 years (p<0.001). Over half PwLADA experienced high (21%) or moderate (35%) distress according to the total distress score. Peak scores (high & moderate) were detected for emotional burden (51% & 31%); followed by interpersonal distress (19% & 27%), regimen distress (20% & 26%) and physician distress (17% &13%). Scores for all categories were comparable to those reported by PwT1D. We explored factors that could modulate distress level among PwLADA including hypoglycemia, use of technology and HbA1c. Significant differences were detected for higher regimen distress among those with severe hypoglycemia in past year (56% vs 18%, p=0.02) and those with A1c >75 mmol/mol (53% vs 11%, p<0.001). Conclusion: Diabetes distress is highly prevalent among PwLADA, especially the emotional burden similar to PwT1D. Further research is warranted to design adequate interventions. Disclosure M. Nehme: None. M. Issa: None. A. Brazeau: Other Relationship; Dexcom, Inc. Research Support; Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation (JDRF), Diabète québec, Fonds de recherche du Québec en Santé. C. Leroux: None. S. Haag: Other Relationship; Omnipod. A. Roy-Fleming: None. N. Taleb: Other Relationship; Dexcom, Inc. Consultant; Viatris Inc. Other Relationship; Novo Nordisk. Funding Funding form the CED-CHUM centre d'Expertise en DiabFte at the Centre de recherche de l'UniversitT de MontrTal
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".