ArticleEndocrinology, diabetes & metabolism2026
Depression Risk in Type 1 Versus Type 2 Diabetes: Cross-Sectional Analysis of Body Mass Index (BMI) in a Nationally Diverse Cohort.
Article in Endocrinology, diabetes & metabolism, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Depression Risk in Type 1 Versus Type 2 Diabetes: Cross-Sectional Analysis of Body Mass Index (BMI) in a Nationally Diverse Cohort.Endocrinology, diabetes & metabolism · 2026Article
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
Abstract
introductionMajor depressive disorder (MDD) commonly co-occurs with diabetes, but comparative risk across type 1 diabetes (DM1), type 2 diabetes (DM2) and non-diabetic groups-and the role of body mass index (BMI)-remains uncertain.
methodsUsing All of Us Research Program data, adults were classified as DM1, DM2 or non-diabetic. Multivariable logistic regression estimated odds of MDD adjusting for age, sex at birth, race and ethnicity; BMI was added in secondary models. Effect modification by sex and race was tested. Structural equation modelling (SEM) assessed whether BMI statistically explained group differences.
resultsIn models excluding BMI, both DM1 and non-diabetic participants had higher odds of MDD than DM2 (DM1 vs. DM2: OR = 1.53, 95% CI 1.17-1.99; non-diabetic vs. DM2: OR = 1.20, 95% CI 1.16-1.25). Interactions by sex and race were significant; contrasts were stronger among females and heterogeneous across race strata. Adding BMI yielded directionally consistent group estimates and confirmed an independent association of higher BMI with higher MDD odds. SEM indicated statistical suppression for the non-diabetic vs. DM2 contrast: non-diabetic status related to lower BMI, while higher BMI related to higher MDD, producing a small indirect effect (~8%). The indirect path for DM1 vs. DM2 was non-significant.
conclusionsCompared with DM2, both DM1 and non-diabetic groups show higher adjusted odds of MDD. BMI is independently related to MDD but only modestly-and partly suppressively-accounts for the non-diabetic vs. DM2 contrast. Findings support subgroup-aware screening and the need for longitudinal data to clarify mechanisms.
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.