ArticleBMJ open2017
Cohort profiles of the cross-sectional and prospective participant groups in the second Diabetes MILES-Australia (MILES-2) study.
Article in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Experiences of diabetes stigma among adults with type 1 and type 2 diabetes: A multi-study, multi-country, secondary analysis.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2025Article
- Diabetes distress and associated psychosocial factors in type 2 diabetes. A population-based cross-sectional study. The HUNT study, Norway.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2025Article
- Associations between weight self-stigma and healthy diet and physical activity among adults with type 2 diabetes: Cross-sectional results from the second Diabetes MILES - Australia (MILES-2) study.Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association · 2025Article
- Feasibility Study to Assess the Incorporation of the Diabetes Distress Assessment System and Diabetes Distress Scale Into a Veterans Administration Diabetes Clinic Practice.Diabetes spectrum : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2025Article
- Diabetes Research Matters: A Three-Round Priority-Setting Survey Consultation with Adults Living with Diabetes and Family Members in Australia.The patient · 2024Article
- The 12-Item Hypoglycemia Impact Profile (HIP12): psychometric validation of a brief measure of the impact of hypoglycemia on quality of life among adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes.BMJ open diabetes research & care · 2022Article
- Psychometric properties of a nationwide survey for adults with and without diabetes: the "disease knowledge and information needs - diabetes mellitus (2017)" survey.BMC public health · 2020Article
- Does Time-in-Range Matter? Perspectives From People With Diabetes on the Success of Current Therapies and the Drivers of Improved Outcomes.Clinical diabetes : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2018Article
- Managing Type 1 Diabetes among Saudi adults on insulin pump therapy during the COVID-19 lockdown.Diabetes & metabolic syndromeArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeMore research into the psychosocial aspects of diabetes is needed so that the health and quality of life of people with the condition can be improved. To fill this gap, we conducted the second Diabetes MILES-Australia study (MILES-2), a survey focused on psychological, behavioural and social aspects of diabetes. The aim of the MILES-2 study was to provide a (1) longitudinal follow-up of the original MILES 2011 study cohort; (2) cross-sectional assessment of a new cohort.
participantsEligible participants were English-speaking Australians with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, aged 18-75 years. Longitudinal cohort participants were mailed/emailed study invitations directly by researchers. Random sampling (stratified by diabetes type, insulin use, state) of the National Diabetes Services Scheme (NDSS) database and nationwide advertisements were used to recruit new cohort participants. The final sample included N=2342 eligible respondents (longitudinal cohort: n=504; 2015 new cohort: n=1838); 54% had type 2 diabetes. FINDINGS TO DATE: Survey respondents were from an advantaged socioeconomic background compared to the general population. Respondents with type 1 diabetes were over-represented in the new cohort (45%) relative to the planned stratification (40% type 1 diabetes, 60% type 2 diabetes). Respondents with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes were under-represented in the new cohort relative to the stratified sampling (42% invited vs 50% response). Participants who completed both the 2011 and 2015 surveys were more likely than those completing the 2011 survey only to have type 1 diabetes, report a higher education and annual income, and live in metropolitan areas. Participant feedback indicated that the survey was perceived as relevant and valuable. FUTURE PLANS: The depth and breadth of the data available in this large sample will highlight unmet needs and priority areas for future investigation and, crucially, will inform policy, programme and intervention development and evaluation in Australia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.