ArticleDiabetologia2020
Association of type 1 diabetes and school wellbeing: a population-based cohort study of 436,439 Danish schoolchildren.
Article in Diabetologia, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- How adolescents with type 1 diabetes experience physical education in middle school: a qualitative study.Diabetologia · 2026Article
- Diabetes Care in the School Setting: A Statement of the American Diabetes Association.Diabetes care · 2024Review
- Diabetes Management Support in Preschool and Primary School: A Qualitative Ideation Study Presenting Recommendations for Improved Communicative Practice.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- ISPAD Clinical Practice Consensus Guidelines 2022: Diabetes in adolescence.Pediatric diabetes · 2022Review
- High engagement in mobile peer support is associated with better glycemic control in type 1 diabetes: A real-world study.Journal of diabetes investigation · 2022Article
- Municipal Support of Diabetes Management in Daycare, Kindergarten and School: A Qualitative Study of Differences, Challenges and Potentials.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- The impact of COVID-19 lockdown on glycaemic control and use of health services among children followed at a Danish diabetes clinic.Acta paediatrica (Oslo, Norway : 1992) · 2022Article
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 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
aims/hypothesisWe aimed to examine the association of type 1 diabetes with school wellbeing among Danish children.
methodsThis is a population-based cohort study involving 436,439 Danish children, of which 1499 had a confirmed diagnosis of type 1 diabetes. The children were enrolled in grade levels 4 to 9 (middle school) in Danish public schools in the years 2014-2017. Questionnaire outcomes from the yearly National Wellbeing Survey related to self-efficacy, perceived competences, peer and teacher support, bullying and somatic symptoms were analysed. Ordered logistic regression was used to compare outcomes of children with and without type 1 diabetes, and to compare subgroups of children with type 1 diabetes by different levels of HbA
resultsA total of 817,679 questionnaires were initiated, of which n = 2681 were from children with type 1 diabetes. Compared with the background population, children with type 1 diabetes expressed more peer support; adjusted OR 1.17 (95% CI 1.08, 1.27). Children with diabetes also reported more often having a headache; adjusted OR 1.09 (95% CI 1.00, 1.19). Overall, children with poor glycaemic control (HbA CONCLUSIONS/
interpretationIn Denmark, children with type 1 diabetes generally feel well supported in school but have more headaches than other children. Poor glycaemic control is associated with worse psychological school-related wellbeing. Graphical abstract.
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.