Cited by 44Diabetes Management and EducationDiabetes Management and ResearchChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

Supporting Teen Problem-Solving (STEPS) 3 year outcomes: preventing diabetes-specific emotional distress and depressive symptoms in adolescents with type 1 diabetes

Open access
Weissberg-Benchell, Jill, Shapiro, Jenna B., Bryant, Fred B., Hood, Korey K.·2020·Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This article reports the 3-year outcomes for the Supporting Teen Problem-Solving (STePS) multisite Randomized Control Trial (RCT); reporting the overall impact of the STePS trial, and the differential impact of each arm of the trial (a resilience promoting intervention [PRP T1D] vs. a diabetes education intervention [EI]) on diabetes-specific emotional distress and depressive symptoms. METHOD: Participants included 264 adolescents with Type 1 diabetes (T1D), ages 14-18, in Chicago and San Francisco. Both intervention arms lasted 4.5 months and assessments were conducted at baseline, postintervention (4.5 months), and 5 follow-up visits (8, 12, 16, 28, and 40 months from baseline). Intervention efficacy was investigated using latent growth curve modeling (LGCM) to analyze the rate and shape of change of outcomes from preintervention across postintervention and follow-up time points. RESULTS: Mean age of participants was 15.7 years, mean T1D duration was 6.9 years, mean HbA1c at baseline was 9.1%. The sample was diverse with nearly 35% identifying as racial or ethnic minorities, and 60% were female. PRP T1D participants reported significantly lower diabetes distress compared with EI participants, and the effect size increased over time. For the pooled sample, while 40% of youth reported elevated distress at baseline, only 23% reported elevated distress 3 years postintervention. Moreover, PRP T1D participants experienced a significant decline in depressive symptoms from 16 to 40 months postbaseline, while participants in the education arm did not. CONCLUSIONS: Results from the 3-year outcomes assessment demonstrate the robust effects of PRP T1D in adolescents with declines in distress and depressive symptoms. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/ccp0000608

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 13

  1. Akaike H (1987). Factor analysis and AIC. Psychometrika, 52(3), 317– 332.
  2. Bollen KA, & Curran PJ (2006). Latent curve models: A structural equation perspective. Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley.
  3. Browne MW, & Cudeck R (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods & Research, 21(2), 230– 258.
  4. Bryant FB, & Satorra A (2012). Principles and practice of scaled difference Chi-square testing. Structural Equation Modeling, 19(3), 372– 398.
  5. Chen H, Cohen P, & Chen S (2010). How big is a big odds ratio? Interpreting the magnitudes of odds ratios in epidemiological studies. Communications in Statistics-Simulation and Computation, 39(4), 860– 864.
  6. Hu L. t., & Bentler PM (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological methods, 3(4), 424.
  7. Luyckx K, & Seiffge-Krenke I (2009). Continuity and change in glycemic control trajectories from adolescence to emerging adulthood: Relationships with family climate and self-concept in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care, 32(5), 797– 801. 19228859 PMC2671120
  8. Marsh HW, Hau K-T, & Wen Z (2004). In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler’s (1999) Findings. Structural Equation Modeling, 11(3), 320– 341.
  9. Muthen LK, & Muthen BO (2017). Mplus user’s guide (Eighth ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthen & Muthen.
  10. Reivich KJ, Gillham J, Chaplin TM, & Seligman ME (2005). From helplessness to optimism: The role of resilience in treating and preventing depression in youth. In Brooks G (Ed.), Handbook of resilience in children. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
  11. Schwarz G (1978). Estimating the dimension of a model. Annals of Statistics, 6(2), 461– 464.
  12. Sclove SL (1987). Application of model-selection criteria to some problems in multivariate analysis. Psychometrika, 52(3), 333– 343.
  13. Serlachius AS, Scratch SE, Northam EA, Frydenberg E, Lee KJ, & Cameron FJ (2016). A randomized controlled trial of cognitive behaviour therapy to improve glycaemic control and psychosocial wellbeing in adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Journal of Health Psychology, 21(6), 1157– 1169. 25213114

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Weissberg-Benchell, J., Shapiro, J. B., Bryant, F. B., & Hood, K. K.
Affiliations
  • Lurie Children's Hospital (US)
  • Loyola University Chicago (US)
  • Stanford University (US)
Venue
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
Published
2020-11
Volume
88
Issue
11
Pages
1019-1031
ISSN
  • 0022-006X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2117
OpenAlex
W3097400848
Cited by
44
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1
FWCI
3.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Diabetes Digestive and Kidney Diseases (1R01DK090030)
  • Dexcom, Inc.
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
type 1 diabetes, adolescents, diabetes distress, depressive symptoms, resilience promotion, diabetes education, problem-solving intervention, long-term outcomes
MeSH terms
Psychological Distress, Adaptation, Psychological, Adolescent, Chicago, Depression, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Female, Humans, Male, Problem Solving, San Francisco

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