ArticleDiseases (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Diabetes Self-Management and Glycemic Control in Adults with Type 2 Diabetes: A Cross-Sectional Analysis with Corrected DSMQ Scoring.
Article in Diseases (Basel, Switzerland), 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAccurate scoring is essential when patient-reported self-management instruments are related to biochemical outcomes. The principal contribution of this study was to reconstruct and audit Diabetes Self-Management Questionnaire (DSMQ) scores from item-level data before reassessing their cross-sectional association with glycemic control.
methodsWe performed a cross-sectional secondary analysis of a clinical database of adults with type 2 diabetes. One non-patient header row was removed. Because 12 observation-sheet identifiers occurred twice and visit dates were unavailable, all 24 records carrying repeated identifiers were excluded from the prespecified primary analysis, leaving 238 records. Negatively keyed DSMQ items were reverse-scored, and total and subscale scores were transformed to a 0-10 scale according to the original algorithm. Associations with HbA1c were assessed using Spearman correlation, exploratory ROC analysis, and multivariable linear regression with HC3 robust standard errors.
resultsHbA1c was available for 237 records; mean age was 64.18 years (SD 11.14), 56.1% of records with valid sex coding were female, and mean HbA1c was 7.81% (SD 1.94). The corrected DSMQ total score was 5.19 (SD 2.36). DSMQ total score correlated inversely with HbA1c (ρ = -0.467, bootstrap 95% CI -0.572 to -0.350;
conclusionsCorrectly scored DSMQ results showed a moderate, independent cross-sectional association with HbA1c. The corrected analysis did not demonstrate excellent discrimination, and the cross-sectional data cannot support causal or predictive claims. Prospective studies with verified unique participants and clearly documented data provenance are needed.
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.