4.5 Article

Depressive states among adults with diabetes: Findings from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2007-2012

期刊

DIABETES RESEARCH AND CLINICAL PRACTICE
卷 127, 期 -, 页码 80-88

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.diabres.2017.02.031

关键词

Subthreshold depression; Diabetes; Adults; NHANES; Subsyndromal depression; Minor depression

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims: To determine (1) the prevalence of SubD states among adults with diabetes, and (2) whether evidence exists of an independent association between diabetes status and SubD, controlling for selected confounders. Methods: Data from the 2007-2012 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys were combined to estimates of depressive states by diabetes status among the noninstitutionalized U.S. adult population, and to assess the association of diabetes status and depressive states using a polytomous logistic regression model. Results: An estimated 17%, or 3.7 million, of U.S. adults with diabetes (diagnosed and undiagnosed) met criteria for either mD or ssD. The majority of SubD cases with diabetes were found to be ssD (10.1%) compared with mD (6.9%). After controlling for the effects of age, sex, race and ethnicity, education, body mass index, and poverty as covariates, an independent association persists between diagnosed diabetes and each SubD grouping (ssD: OR = 1.82, CIs 1.33, 2.47; mD: OR = 1.95, CIs 1.39, 2.74) compared with respondents having no diabetes. No association was found between depression and undiagnosed diabetes or prediabetes compared with those having no diabetes. Conclusion: Milder forms of depression such as ssD and mD are more extant than major depressive episodes among adults with diabetes. The odds that an adult with diagnosed diabetes meets the criteria for ssD or mD are higher by 80% and 95%, respectively, after controlling for age, sex, race and ethnicity, education, body mass index, and poverty factors when compared against adults with no diabetes. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据