↓ Skip to main content

Change in self-rated general health is associated with perceived illness burden: a 1-year follow up of patients newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Change in self-rated general health is associated with perceived illness burden: a 1-year follow up of patients newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes
Published in
BMC Public Health, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-1790-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anni Brit Sternhagen Nielsen, Per Jensen, Dorte Gannik, Susanne Reventlow, Hanne Hollnagel, Niels de Fine Olivarius

Abstract

Diabetic patients' lifestyle adaptations to improve glycaemic control are not always followed by improvements in self-rated general health (SRH). The perceived impact of diabetes on patients' daily lives may influence changes in their SRH. This paper examines the association of illness severity, treatment, behavioural, and coping-related factors with changes in SRH from diagnosis of type 2 diabetes until one year later, in a population-based sample of 599 patients aged 40 years or over who were treated in general practice. Change in SRH was estimated by a cumulative probit model with the inclusion of covariates related to SRH (e.g. illness severity at diagnosis, behaviour, treatment, and the perceived impact of diabetes on patients' daily lives one year later). At diagnosis, 11.6% of patients reported very good, 35.1% good, 44.6% fair and 8.5% poor SRH. Physical inactivity, many diabetes-related symptoms, and cardiovascular disease were related to lower SRH ratings. On average SRH improved by 0.46 (95% CI: 0.37; 0.55) during the first year after diagnosis without inclusion of covariates. Mental and practical illness burden was the only factor associated with change in SRH, independent of patients' diabetes severity and medical treatment (p = 0.03, multivariate analysis). Compared to otherwise similar patients without illness burden, increase in SRH was marginally smaller among patients who expressed minor illness burden, but much smaller among patients with more pronounced illness burden. Much as one would expect, many patients increased their SRH during the first year after diabetes diagnosis. This increase in SRH was not associated with indicators of illness severity or factors reflecting socio-demographic circumstances, but patients experiencing illness burden had a smaller increase than those who reported no illness burden. We suggest that during the diabetes consultation, general practitioners explore further how patients manage their illness burden. We further suggest that diabetes guidelines extend their current focus on clinical and social aspects of diabetes to include questions on patient's perceived illness burden and SRH.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
South Africa 1 2%
Unknown 55 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 18%
Researcher 6 11%
Student > Bachelor 6 11%
Other 3 5%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 10 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 18%
Social Sciences 5 9%
Sports and Recreations 2 4%
Psychology 2 4%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 13 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 May 2015.
All research outputs
#15,331,767
of 22,803,211 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#11,337
of 14,855 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,676
of 263,973 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#185
of 239 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,803,211 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,855 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 263,973 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 239 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.