↓ Skip to main content

The Relationship Between Food Insecurity and Depression, Diabetes Distress and Medication Adherence Among Low-Income Patients with Poorly-Controlled Diabetes

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of General Internal Medicine, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
154 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
457 Mendeley
Title
The Relationship Between Food Insecurity and Depression, Diabetes Distress and Medication Adherence Among Low-Income Patients with Poorly-Controlled Diabetes
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine, April 2015
DOI 10.1007/s11606-015-3351-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julie Silverman, James Krieger, Meghan Kiefer, Paul Hebert, June Robinson, Karin Nelson

Abstract

Food insecurity- lack of dependable access to adequate food-may play a role in poor diabetes control. We aimed to determine the relationship between food security status and depression, diabetes distress, medication adherence and glycemic control. Secondary analysis of baseline data from Peer Support for Achieving Independence in Diabetes, a randomized controlled trial that enrolled patients from November 2011 to October 2013. Participants had poorly controlled type 2 diabetes (A1c ≥ 8.0 % on eligibility screen), household income < 250 % of the federal poverty level, were 30-70 years old, and were recruited from a large public hospital, a VA medical center and a community-health center in King County, Washington. We measured food insecurity determined by the Department of Agriculture's 6-Item Food Security Module. Depression, diabetes distress and medication adherence measured by PHQ-8, Diabetes Distress Scale and Morisky Medication Adherence Scale, respectively. Diet was assessed through Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities and Starting the Conversation tool. Incidence of hypoglycemic episodes was by patient report. Glycemic control was assessed with glycosylated hemoglobin (A1c) values from fingerstick blood sample. The prevalence of food insecurity was 47.4 %. Chi-square tests revealed participants with food insecurity were more likely to be depressed (40.7 % vs. 15.4 %, p < 0.001), report diabetes distress (55.2 % vs. 33.8 %, p < 0.001) and have low medication adherence (52.9 % vs. 37.2 %, p = 0.02). Based on linear regression modeling, those with food insecurity had significantly higher mean A1c levels (β = 0.51; p = 0.02) after adjusting for sex, age, race/ethnicity, language, education, marital status, BMI, insulin use, depression, diabetes distress and low medication adherence. Almost half of participants had food insecurity. Food insecurity was associated with depression, diabetes distress, low medication adherence and worse glycemic control. Even with adjustment, people with food insecurity had higher mean A1c levels than their food-secure counterparts, suggesting there may be other mediating factors, such as diet, that explain the relationship between food security status and diabetes control.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 457 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Malaysia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 454 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 68 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 51 11%
Student > Bachelor 51 11%
Researcher 39 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 35 8%
Other 78 17%
Unknown 135 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 95 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 65 14%
Social Sciences 45 10%
Psychology 33 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 11 2%
Other 49 11%
Unknown 159 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 29 September 2023.
All research outputs
#6,997,686
of 25,576,801 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#3,754
of 8,225 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,446
of 279,708 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#43
of 119 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,576,801 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,225 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
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 279,708 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 119 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.