Prospective study on influence of psychosocial factors on glycemic control in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes
Abstract
The authors prospectively assessed the causal relationship between psychosocial factors and glycemic control in 256 Japanese outpatients with Type 2 diabetes. Using structural-equation modeling, they first developed a causal model in which glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)) at 6 months after assessment was influenced by the baseline psychosocial factors. Then, the reliability of the causal model was investigated with measurement of HbA(1c) at 12 months after baseline. Self-efficacy directly reinforced adherence, and adherence had a direct association with future HbA(1c). Other psychosocial factors, including social support, diabetes-related distress, daily burden, and emotion-focused coping prospectively influenced HbA(1c) indirectly through self-efficacy.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Among people with diabetes, positive psychological attributes like optimism and positive affect correlate with better medical results, such as improved glucose control and reduced mortality.
“In patients with diabetes, psychological well-being constructs (e.g., optimism, positive affect) have been associated with superior medical outcomes, including better glucose control and lower mortality rates.”
From Well-being interventions for individuals with diabetes: A systematic review (2019) · cites this paper as [23]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 42 · Cited by 114
- Authors
- Nakahara, R., Yoshiuchi, K., Kumano, H., Hara, Y., Suematsu, H., & Kuboki, T.
- Affiliations
- Kawamura Gakuen Women's University (JP)
- Corresponding author
- Nakahara, Rika
- Venue
- Psychosomatics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2006-05
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 240-246
- ISSN
- 0033-3182 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2110187852
- Cited by
- 114
- References
- 42
- Citations by year
- 2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 14
- FWCI
- 4.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychosomatics (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Medication Adherence and Compliance
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
- Keywords
- type 2 diabetes, glycemic control, psychosocial factors, HbA1c, self-efficacy, medication adherence, social support, diabetes distress, emotion-focused coping, causal models, Japanese patients
- MeSH terms
- Adaptation, Psychological, Aged, Ambulatory Care, Blood Glucose, Cross-Cultural Comparison, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Emotions, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Japan, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Compliance, Prospective Studies, Sick Role, Social Support, Stress, Psychological, Self Efficacy, Diabetes Complications
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
