Cited by 77Mindfulness and Compassion InterventionsDiabetes Management and EducationDiabetes Treatment and Management

A randomized controlled trial of acceptance and commitment therapy for type 2 diabetes management: the moderating role of coping styles

Open access
Shayeghian, Zeinab, Hassanabadi, Hamidreza, Aguilar-Vafaie, Maria E., Amiri, Parisa, Besharat, Mohammad Ali·2016·PLoS ONE

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Evidence of the efficacy of existing psychological interventions for self-management in diabetes is limited. The current study aimed at assessing the effects of group-based ACT on self-management of patients with T2DM, considering the moderating role of coping styles. METHODS: One hundred and six patients with type 2 diabetes were randomly assigned either to the education alone (n = 53) or to a combination of education and group-based acceptance and commitment therapy (n = 53) over a period of 10 sessions. In each group, 50 participants completed a 3 month follow-up assessment. RESULTS: After 3 months, compared to patients who received education alone, those in the group-based acceptance and commitment therapy condition were more likely to use effective coping strategies, reported better diabetes self-care, and optimum glycated hemoglobin (HbA1C) levels in the target range. CONCLUSIONS: Consideration of the role of coping style for a more accurate evaluation of the effects of acceptance and commitment therapy may be a useful addition to services provided for patients with type 2 diabetes.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0166599

Cites

44 of 44 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Shayeghian, Z., Hassanabadi, H., Aguilar-Vafaie, M. E., Amiri, P., & Besharat, M. A.
Affiliations
  • Research Institute for Endocrine Sciences (IR)
  • Kharazmi University (IR)
Corresponding author
Amiri, Parisa
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2016-12-01
Volume
11
Issue
12
Pages
e0166599
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2558477713
Cited by
77
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 5
FWCI
6.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
Keywords
acceptance and commitment therapy, type 2 diabetes, diabetes self-management, coping styles, HbA1c, diabetes self-care, psychological intervention, diabetes education, moderating effect
MeSH terms
Aged, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Female, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Self Care, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy

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