Cited by 194Diabetes Management and EducationDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsDiabetes Treatment and Management

Nutrition Education Improves Metabolic Outcomes among Older Adults with Diabetes Mellitus: Results from a Randomized Controlled Trial

Miller, Carla K, Edwards, Lesley, Kissling, Grace, Sanville, Laurel·2002·Preventive Medicine

Abstract

Background Few diabetes education programs have been designed specifically for older adults. This study evaluated the impact of a nutrition intervention on the blood glucose and lipoprotein levels of adults > or =65 years of age without functional limitations but with type 2 diabetes for > or =1 year.Methods Ninety-eight people were randomized to the experimental or control group. A pretest-posttest control group design was used to evaluate the intervention. Ninety-two people (94%) completed the study. The 10-week intervention incorporated principles from information processing, learning theory, and Social Cognitive Theory to meet the needs of older adults. Analysis of covariance compared outcomes between groups. The paired t test compared results within groups.Results Participants exceeded the guidelines for optimal glycemic control at pretest. The experimental group had greater improvements in fasting plasma glucose (P = 0.05) and glycated hemoglobin (P < 0.01) than the control group. Significantly more participants in the experimental group than control group met the treatment goals for total cholesterol at posttest (P < 0.05).Conclusions Older adults with diabetes need additional education to achieve metabolic control. Nutrition education can improve metabolic control among this cohort. Improved metabolic outcomes reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with diabetes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1006/pmed.2001.0985

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • MNT has proven to be beneficial in older adults with diabetes.

    “MNT has proven to be beneficial in older adults with diabetes84.”

    From Diabetes in Older Adults: A Consensus Report (2012) · cites this paper as [84]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Miller, C. K., Edwards, L., Kissling, G., & Sanville, L.
Affiliations
University of North Carolina at Greensboro (US)
Corresponding author
Miller, Carla K
Venue
Preventive Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2002-02
Volume
34
Issue
2
Pages
252-259
ISSN
0091-7435 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1979270351
Cited by
194
References
40
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 7
FWCI
4.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Preventive Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (1r15dk055989-01)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (R15 DK 55989)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
Keywords
nutrition education, type 2 diabetes, older adults, glycemic control, fasting blood glucose, HbA1c, lipoproteins, total cholesterol, diabetes education, social cognitive theory, learning theory, information processing
MeSH terms
Aged, Blood Glucose, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Female, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Lipoproteins, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Education as Topic, Self Care, United States, Nutritional Sciences

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review