ArticleBMJ open diabetes research & care2019
Diabetes causal attributions among affected and unaffected individuals.
Article in BMJ open diabetes research & care, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Using stereotype violation to shift causal understanding and attitudes about weight.Eating behaviors · 2024Trial
- Parents see genes at play: Parenthood and heritability attributions about "lifestyle" diseases.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2025Article
- Diabetes knowledge, risk and severity perceptions, lifestyle behaviours and management barriers among Sub-Saharan African immigrants living in the UK: an ethnographic study.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Diabetes Research Matters: A Three-Round Priority-Setting Survey Consultation with Adults Living with Diabetes and Family Members in Australia.The patient · 2024Article
- Diabetes causal attributions: Pathways to stigma and health.Stigma and health · 2024Article
- The influence of weight on psychosocial well-being in diabetes.BMC psychology · 2023Article
- Exploring the impact of genetic beliefs about specific eating behaviors on dietary self-efficacy.Journal of behavioral medicine · 2022Article
- Preferred level of categorization as strategy to manage chronic illness-related identity among individuals with type 1 versus type 2 diabetes.Self and identity : the journal of the International Society for Self and Identity · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: The present study aims to describe and compare causal attributions for type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) among affected and unaffected individuals and to investigate the relationships among attributions, attitudes, and beliefs. Research design and methods: Adults with no diabetes (N=458), T1D (N=192), or T2D (N=207) completed an online survey. Measures assessed diabetes conceptual knowledge, causal attributions for T1D and T2D, perceived control over diabetes onset, and favorability judgements of individuals affected by each type. Results: Results indicate general agreement on causal attributions for T1D and T2D among all respondent groups, with some divergences by disease status. All respondents attributed both T1D and T2D to genetics, and genetic attributions were positively associated with favorability judgements of individuals with T2D, but not those with T1D. Conclusions: This report sets the stage for investigations into how and why attributions for T1D and T2D differ and the implications of these differences including stigmatization of individuals with diabetes and diabetes-related self-concept. Additionally, this work can inform efforts towards clinical and public health education to prevent and optimize treatment of T1D and T2D.
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.