Cited by 152Diabetes Management and EducationDiabetes Management and ResearchHealth and Wellbeing Research

Relationships among self-care agency, self-efficacy, self-care, and glycemic control

Sousa, Valmi D., Zauszniewski, Jaclene A., Musil, Carol M., Price Lea, Patricia J., Davis, Schenita A.·2005·Research and theory for nursing practice

Abstract

Costly complications of diabetes often arise from poor glycemic control. Appropriate diabetes self-care management may improve control. This study examined whether self-care management affects glycemic control and mediates relationships between self-efficacy and self-care agency with glycemic control. In a cross-sectional correlational design, data from a prior study of 141 insulin-requiring adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes were examined using descriptive statistics, Pearson's correlation, and multiple hierarchical regression. Findings indicated that greater self-care agency and self-efficacy lead to greater self-care management, in turn leading to better glycemic control. Self-care management did not mediate between self-efficacy or self-care agency and glycemic control. Thus, beliefs or capabilities for self-care are insufficient to improve glycemic control; doing so requires self-care management.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1891/rtnp.2005.19.3.217

Cites

34 of 34 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?

  • 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.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sousa, V. D., Zauszniewski, J. A., Musil, C. M., Price Lea, P. J., & Davis, S. A.
Affiliations
North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University (US)
Venue
Research and theory for nursing practice
Published
2005-09
Volume
19
Issue
3
Pages
217-230
ISSN
  • 0889-7182 (ISSN-L)
  • 1541-6577
  • 1945-7286
OpenAlex
W1976935855
Cited by
152
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 11
FWCI
2.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Research and theory for nursing practice (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 › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health and Wellbeing Research
Keywords
diabetes self-care, self-care agency, self-efficacy, glycemic control, insulin-treated diabetes, type 1 diabetes, type 2 diabetes, mediation, diabetes complications
MeSH terms
Adult, Cross-Sectional Studies, Diabetes Mellitus, Female, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Internal-External Control, Male, Middle Aged, Regression Analysis, Self Care, Multivariate Analysis, Self Efficacy

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