ArticleHealth science reports2025
Diabetes Mellitus Type 2 and Popular Misconceptions: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Health science reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Diabetes mellitus is a chronic condition demanding continuous monitoring to mitigate potential complications. One major obstacle to effective treatment lies in widespread misconceptions across key domains, including pathogenesis, nutrition and lifestyle, management and follow-up, and complications and social stigma. This study aimed to evaluate patient misconceptions about the causes and management of diabetes and explore their prevalence concerning factors such as age and gender. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted in Isfahan, Iran, between 2021 and 2022. A total of 390 individuals diagnosed with type 2 diabetes mellitus were included through a convenient sampling method from different diabetes centers. Data were collected using a questionnaire about the causes of diabetes mellitus, dietary guidelines, medical interventions, and associated complications. The results were analyzed with a Results: A total of 390 participants, with a mean age of 56 ± 13.4 years and 58% females, participated in the study. The most prevalent myths about diabetes mellitus identified in this study include: only solid oils are fattening (302, 77.4%), diabetic patients are permitted to take any quantity of dried mulberries (201, 51.5%), diabetes is only a hereditary disease (177, 45.3%), diabetes can only strike obese individuals (167, 42.8%), and fruits can be consumed in any quantity by diabetic individuals because fruit sugar is a natural substance (143, 36.6%). Conclusion: Patients' misunderstandings of the etiology and management of diabetes mellitus are diverse. Given that myths can negatively affect glycemic control; patient education is crucial to effective management.
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.