Cited by 149Diabetes Management and EducationOptimism, Hope, and Well-beingResilience and Mental Health

Coping with diabetes in adulthood: a meta-analysis

Duangdao, Kate M., Roesch, Scott C.·2008·Journal of Behavioral Medicine

Abstract

Objective A meta-analysis was performed to summarize the relations between coping dimensions (i.e., avoidance, approach, emotion-focused, and problem-focused) and indices of adjustment (i.e., overall, depression, anxiety, glycemic control) in individuals with diabetes.Methods Relevant methodological and statistical information was culled from 21 primary studies consisting of 3,381 people with diabetes. The correlation coefficient was used as the target effect size.Results Use of approach and problem-focused coping was associated with better overall adjustment (small-to-medium effect sizes). Avoidance and emotion-focused coping were not significantly related to overall adjustment. However, negative effect sizes medium-to-large in magnitude were found between emotion-focused coping and specific indices of adjustment (anxiety, depression).Conclusions These findings suggest that coping methods aimed at assuaging both the concomitant negative feelings and specific stressors, such as meeting with doctors and engaging in a new treatment regimen commonly associated with diabetes management, largely improve psychological health. However, these relations are dependent upon both the specific coping method used and the index of adjustment assessed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10865-008-9155-6

Cites

67 of 67 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?

  • Suboptimal self-management can result from functional limitations, insufficient diabetes education, forgetting and disrupted routines, or psychosocial barriers such as inadequate social support, misinformation, emotional distress, or poor problem-solving and coping skills.

    “Suboptimal self-management may be due to functional limitations (e.g., blindness, problems with dexterity, low health literacy and numeracy), lack of appropriate diabetes education, forgetting and disruption in routines,”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Duangdao, K. M., & Roesch, S. C.
Affiliations
  • University of Nebraska–Lincoln (US)
  • San Diego State University (US)
Corresponding author
Roesch, Scott C.
Venue
Journal of Behavioral Medicine
Published
2008-05-21
Volume
31
Issue
4
Pages
291-300
ISSN
  • 0160-7715 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-3521
OpenAlex
W1976955060
Cited by
149
References
67
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 6
FWCI
1.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Behavioral Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Optimism, Hope, and Well-being
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Resilience and Mental Health
Keywords
diabetes mellitus, coping strategies, problem-focused coping, emotion-focused coping, avoidance coping, approach coping, psychological adjustment, depression, anxiety, glycemic control, diabetes management
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Anxiety, Avoidance Learning, Defense Mechanisms, Depression, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Emotions, Female, Humans, Male, Problem Solving, Illness Behavior

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