Psychosocial Experiences of Adolescents With Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-synthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Globally, the prevalence of type 2 diabetes (T2D) among adolescents is increasing. Although T2D is known to bring physical health challenges, less is known about adolescents' psychosocial experiences of T2D. We aimed to identify and synthesize existing qualitative research about adolescents' psychosocial experiences of T2D to inform health-care recommendations. Guided by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses and Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines, we conducted a systematic review and meta-synthesis using a meta-aggregative approach. We searched 5 electronic databases to identify qualitative or mixed-methods primary studies examining adolescents' psychosocial experiences of T2D, published in English, in a peer-reviewed journal from database inception to August 2024. Eight studies were included, with findings aggregated into 2 synthesized findings related to the diagnosis of T2D and living with T2D. At diagnosis, adolescents had limited knowledge of T2D, often obtained via observing family members with T2D, and desired further education. Adolescents also described a range of negative emotions, some of which influenced disclosure of their diagnosis. In living with T2D, adolescents contended with psychosocial challenges, with some viewing T2D as a burden and others as an opportunity for positive self-care and lifestyle changes. Adolescents described challenges with health behaviour changes and medical management. Social support was noted to be important. Adolescents with T2D have limited knowledge about the condition and desire greater education. They experience a range of emotions and challenges with T2D management and benefit from support. Based on our findings, we propose recommendations that may optimize adolescents' physical, psychological, and social well-being.
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 | 0.010 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.016 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".