The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Prevalence of Depression in Adults With Diabetes: An epidemiological evaluation
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of depression in adult diabetic populations through a comprehensive literature review and to critically evaluate the methods and findings of such studies from an epidemiological perspective. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A systematic review of the scientific literature revealed a total of 20 studies, 14 of which had been conducted since 1988. Nine of the studies were controlled investigations, whereas the remaining 11 studies did not contain comparison groups. The studies included both treatment and community samples. RESULTS: The range of the prevalence of current depression obtained from structured diagnostic interviews in diabetic samples was 8.5–27.3% ( = 14.0%) in controlled studies and 11.0–19.9% ( = 15.4%) in uncontrolled studies. These rates are at least three times the prevalence of major depressive disorder found in the general adult population of the U.S. Investigations using depression symptom scales corroborated these findings, as the range of clinically significant depression symptomatology in diabetic samples was 21.8–60.0% ( = 32.4%) in controlled studies and 10.0–28.0% ( = 19.6%) in uncontrolled studies. CONCLUSIONS: An increased prevalence of depression in diabetes relative to the general population is highly suggested by the literature, but biases and methodological problems commonly encountered in prevalence studies may interfere with the strength of this conclusion. An increased prevalence of depression in diabetes relative to other somatic illnesses remains unproven. The pervasive impact of depression on quality of life and its potential negative effect on diabetes management warrant recognition and treatment of the affective disorder in diabetic individuals.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
The Prevalence of Comorbid Depression in Adults With Diabetes
Anderson, R. J., Freedland, K. E., Clouse, R. E., & Lustman, P. J. (2001) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/diacare.24.6.1069 · Cited by 3,926
Self-citationKirkman, M. S., Briscoe, V. J., Clark, N., Florez, H., Haas, L. B., Halter, J. B., Huang, E. S., Korytkowski, M. T., Munshi, M. N., Odegard, P. S., et al. (2012) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc12-1801 · Cited by 1,274
Mood disorders in the medically ill: scientific review and recommendations
Evans, D. L., Charney, D. S., Lewis, L., Golden, R. N., Gorman, J. M., Krishnan, K. R. R., Nemeroff, C. B., Bremner, J. D., Carney, R. M., Coyne, J. C., et al. (2005) · Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2005.05.001 · Cited by 1,071
Egede, L. E., Zheng, D., & Simpson, K. (2002) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/diacare.25.3.464 · Cited by 816
Guidelines for improving the care of the older person with diabetes mellitus
California Healthcare Foundation/American Geriatrics Society, C. (2003) · Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · doi:10.1046/j.1532-5415.51.5s.1.x · Cited by 651
Metadata
- Authors
- Gavard, J. A., Lustman, P. J., & Clouse, R. E.
- Venue
- Diabetes Care
- Publisher
- American Diabetes Association
- Published
- 1993-08-01
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1167-1178
- ISSN
- 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
- 1935-5548
- OpenAlex
- W2030396551
- Cited by
- 622
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 4.31
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Prevalence of Depression in Adults With Diabetes: An epidemiological evaluation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2337/diacare.16.8.1167
- The paper
- Gavard, J. A., Lustman, P. J., & Clouse, R. E. (1993). Prevalence of Depression in Adults With Diabetes: An epidemiological evaluation. Diabetes Care. https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.16.8.1167
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.