Cited by 101Diabetes Management and EducationMedication Adherence and ComplianceDiabetes Management and Research

An Assessment of Attitudes, Behaviors, and Outcomes of Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

Open access
Daly, J. M., Hartz, A. J., Xu, Y., Levy, B. T., James, P. A., Merchant, M. L., Garrett, R. E.·2009·The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Patient self-care behaviors, including taking medication, following a meal plan, exercising regularly, and testing blood glucose, influence diabetes control. The purpose of this research was to identify (1) which barriers to diabetes management are associated with problem behaviors and (2) which patient behaviors and barriers are associated with diabetes control. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of linked medical record and self-reported information from patients with type 2 diabetes. A randomly selected sample of 800 clinic patients was mailed an investigator-developed survey. The study sample consisted of 253 (55%) individuals who had measured glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) within 3 months of the survey date. RESULTS: The barriers to each diabetes self-care behavior differed. Cost was the most common barrier to the 4 self-care behaviors. In a multivariable regression model, the belief that type 2 diabetes is a serious problem and depression were strongly associated with higher HbA1c levels. Lower HbA1c levels were significantly associated with being married and greater self-reported adherence-satisfaction with taking medication and testing blood glucose. CONCLUSION: This study expanded earlier research by focusing on 4 specific self-care behaviors, their barriers, and their association with HbA1c. Barriers that were significantly associated with HbA1c were specific to the behavior and varied across behaviors.

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 · 10.3122/jabfm.2009.03.080114

Cites

48 of 48 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?

  • Depression, poor general health, high stress, and obesity result in poor glycemic control.

    “risk factors such as depression, poor general health, high-stress levels, and obesity result in poor glycemic control.”

    From Factors Associated with Long-Term Control of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (2016) · cites this paper as [10]

    The Discussion (page not provided) reports that depression, BMI, and physical health were associated with HbA1c, and suggests that improving health and weight control could improve glycemic control. But this cross-sectional study does not establish that those factors cause poor control, and the cited passages do not identify high stress as a factor. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [11]11. Glasgow R. Social-environmental factors in diabetes: barriers to diabetes self-care. In: Bradley C, ed. Handbook of psychology and diabetes. Chur Swit- zerland: Harwood Academics Publishing;1994:335- 49.
  2. [20]20. Reliability and validity of a diabetes quality-of-life measure for the diabetes control and complications trial (DCCT). The DCCT Research Group. Diabe- tes Care 1988;11:725-32.
  3. [32]32. Hess GE, Davis WK, Harrison RV. A diabetes psy- chosocial profile. Diabetes Educ 1986;12:135-40.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Daly, J. M., Hartz, A. J., Xu, Y., Levy, B. T., James, P. A., Merchant, M. L., & Garrett, R. E.
Affiliations
University of Iowa (US)
Corresponding author
Daly, J. M.
Venue
The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine
Published
2009-05-01
Volume
22
Issue
3
Pages
280-290
ISSN
  • 1557-2625 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-7118
OpenAlex
W2148244769
Cited by
101
References
48
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 10
FWCI
7.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
  • Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (5 RO3 HS014410)
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, diabetes self-care, barriers to self-care, HbA1c, medication adherence, blood glucose monitoring, cost barriers, depression, marital status, diabetes management
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cross-Sectional Studies, Depression, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Diet, Diabetic, Female, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Hypoglycemic Agents, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Male, Middle Aged, Monitoring, Physiologic, Patient Compliance, Population Surveillance, Surveys and Questionnaires, Self Care, Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring, Exercise, Comorbidity, Logistic Models, Treatment Outcome

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