Cited by 64Diabetes Management and EducationDiabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes Treatment and Management

Emotional distress is associated with poor self care in type 2 diabetes mellitus: Emotional distress and self-care in T2DM

OGBERA, Anthonia, ADEYEMI-DORO, Adekunle·2011·Journal of Diabetes

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to evaluate possible clinical and psychosocial variables that influence diabetes self-care management in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). METHODS: A total of 150 individuals with T2DM who had had diabetes for at least 6 months were recruited to this cross-sectional study. Levels of self-care and psychosocial status were determined using the Self-Care Inventory (SCI) and Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID) scale. The PAID scores were calculated using a five-point Likert scale with options ranging from 0 (not a problem) to 4 (serious problem). Data were evaluated using non-parametric and parametric tests as appropriate. RESULTS: The mean age of the study participants was 69.97 ± 8.68 years. Cronbach's α for SCI and PAID scores was 0.85 and 0.98, respectively. People with poor glycemic control had significantly higher mean (±SD) total PAID scores than individuals with good glycemic control (29.5 ± 30.9 vs 16.7 ± 26.9, respectively; P = 0.012). There was a significant relationship between PAID scores and glycemic control (r = 0.2; P = 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrates that psychosocial factors directly influence glycemic control and diabetes self-care habits. In addition, diabetes-specific distress in study population was unrelated to the duration of diabetes, the age of the patients and anthropometric indices.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1753-0407.2011.00156.x

Cites

14 of 14 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?

  • The same 2.0 cut-point was demonstrated with A1C and diabetes management variables when a different scale to assess DD was administered to adults with T2D.

    “Interestingly, the same 2.0 cut-point was demonstrated with A1C and diabetes management variables when a different scale to assess DD was administered to adults with T2D [17].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
OGBERA, A., & ADEYEMI-DORO, A.
Affiliations
Lagos University Teaching Hospital (NG)
Corresponding author
OGBERA, Anthonia
Venue
Journal of Diabetes
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-11-25
Volume
3
Issue
4
Pages
348-352
ISSN
1753-0393 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2135570834
Cited by
64
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Diabetes (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
Keywords
type 2 diabetes, diabetes self-care, emotional distress, glycemic control, psychosocial factors, Problem Areas in Diabetes scale
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Female, Humans, Male, Self Care, Stress, Psychological, Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring

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