ArticleCureus2026
Diabetes-Related Distress, Psychosocial Predictors, and Glycemic Control in Jordanian Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundDiabetes-related distress (DRD) represents a significant emotional burden for individuals living with diabetes mellitus; however, its relationship with glycemic control has received comparatively limited attention in clinical populations across the Middle East. The present study investigated the association between DRD and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), alongside the contributory roles of self-management adherence, social support, and self-efficacy.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study of 201 adults with diabetes. DRD was measured using a seven-item Likert scale (1-6), with higher scores indicating greater distress. We also assessed social support (seven items), self-efficacy (five items), and self-management adherence across six behavioral domains. Glycemic control was assessed by HbA1c, with a value below 7% considered adequate. Pearson correlations and multiple linear regression were used to analyze the data.
resultsThe mean HbA1c was 7.93 ± 2.01%; only 36.8% of participants reached adequate glycemic control. DRD was positively correlated with HbA1c (r = 0.344, p < 0.001), while self-management adherence (r = -0.313, p < 0.001), social support (r = -0.180, p = 0.011), and self-efficacy (r = -0.143, p = 0.043) were each inversely associated with it. Participants in the high DRD group had a mean HbA1c of 8.83%, compared with 7.15% in the low DRD group. The regression model explained 24.2% of the variance in HbA1c (R² = 0.242, adjusted R² = 0.219), with DRD emerging as the strongest positive predictor (β = 0.313) and self-management adherence as the strongest negative predictor (β = -0.295); diabetes duration also made a significant independent contribution (β = 0.208, p = 0.002). No significant gender difference in DRD was observed (p = 0.429).
conclusionsDiabetes-related distress was the strongest independent predictor of poor glycemic control, with self-management adherence and diabetes duration also making significant independent contributions. Social support and self-efficacy showed bivariate associations with HbA1c that were not sustained after multivariate adjustment, suggesting their effects operate indirectly through distress and self-management pathways rather than as direct glycemic predictors. These findings support integrating routine distress screening and multidisciplinary psychosocial care into outpatient diabetes 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.