| Title |
Explaining the Association between Early Adversity and Young Adults’ Diabetes Outcomes: Physiological, Psychological, and Behavioral Mechanisms
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Youth and Adolescence, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10964-017-0639-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kandauda A. S. Wickrama, Dayoung Bae, Catherine Walker O’Neal |
| Abstract |
Previous studies have documented that early adversity increases young adults' risk for diabetes resulting in morbidity and comorbidity with adverse health conditions. However, less is known about how inter-related physiological (e.g., body mass index [BMI]), psychological (e.g., depressive symptoms), and behavioral mechanisms (e.g., unhealthy eating and sedentary behavior) link early adversity to young adults' diabetes outcomes, although these mechanisms appear to stem from early stressful experiences. The current study tested the patterning of these longitudinal pathways leading to young adults' diabetes using a nationally representative sample of 13,286 adolescents (54% female) over a period of 13 years. The findings indicated that early adversity contributed to elevated BMI, depressive symptoms, and stress-related health behaviors. The impact of these linking mechanisms on hierarchical diabetes outcomes (i.e., prediabetes and diabetes) remained significant after taking their associations with each other into account, showing that these mechanisms operate concurrently. The findings emphasize the importance of early detection for risk factors of young adults' diabetes in order to minimize their detrimental health effects. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 50% |
| United States | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 81 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 14% |
| Researcher | 9 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 10% |
| Other | 10 | 12% |
| Unknown | 26 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 12 | 15% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 14% |
| Psychology | 9 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 10 | 12% |
| Unknown | 29 | 36% |
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 10 March 2017.
All research outputs
#16,223,992
of 23,906,448 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Youth and Adolescence
#1,342
of 1,813 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#263,294
of 425,813 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Youth and Adolescence
#17
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,906,448 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,813 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.7. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 425,813 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 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.