ArticleBMC nursing2023
Association between type 2 diabetes mellitus and depression among Korean midlife women: a cross-sectional analysis study.
Article in BMC nursing, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Article
- Age of onset, sociodemographic, and clinical predictors of depression: a population-based study in Rural Southern Iran.BMC public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe prevalence of depression is higher among midlife women, and they have less control over their diabetes during the menopausal transition. However, there is limited evidence on the association between type 2 diabetes mellitus and depression among Korean women in their midlife. This study aimed to examine the association between type 2 diabetes mellitus and depression and explore the levels of awareness and treatment of depression among Korean midlife women with T2DM.
methodsThis is a cross-sectional analysis study conducted using data from the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys of 2014, 2016, and 2018. Korean women aged 40-64 years who randomly participated in the surveys were included, and 4,063 midlife women were selected as study participants. The diabetes progression status of the participants was classified into diabetes, pre-diabetes, and non-diabetes. Furthermore, the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 was used for screening depression. Participants' awareness rate, treatment rate among incident cases of depression, and treatment rate among awareness cases of depression were also analyzed. For data analysis, the Rao-Scott χ2 test, multiple logistic regression, and linear regression were conducted using SAS 9.4 software program.
resultsThe prevalence of depression significantly differed between diabetes, pre-diabetes, and non-diabetes groups. However, depression awareness, treatment/incident, and treatment/awareness rates did not differ statistically between the diabetes progression status groups. Compared to the non-diabetes group, diabetes group had a higher odds ratio of depression after adjusting for general and health-related factors. Thus, the diabetes group had significantly higher PHQ-9 scores than the non-diabetes group after adjusting for covariates.
conclusionsWomen in their midlife who have type 2 diabetes mellitus tend to have higher levels of depressive symptoms and are at risk of depression. However, we found no significant differences between diabetes and non-diabetes regarding the awareness and treatment rates of depression in South Korea. We recommend that future studies focus on developing clinical practice guidelines aimed at additional screening and intervention for depression in midlife women with type 2 diabetes mellitus to ensure prompt treatment and improved outcomes.
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.