M Peyrot1, R R Rubin. 1. Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the structure and correlates of diabetes-specific locus of control. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Study participants were 165 adult patients from a comprehensive outpatient diabetes education program who completed a research protocol at the outset of the program. The protocol included measures of diabetes locus of control (DLC), glycemic control, self-care behavior, and emotional well-being. RESULTS: Scales measuring internal and powerful other DLC each had two components. One component of internal DLC, autonomy, was significantly associated with positive outcomes, and the other component, self-blame, was related to negative outcomes. The two components of powerful other DLC were differently correlated with various aspects of strict regimen adherence, and chance DLC was associated with a variety of measures reflecting a pattern of dysfunction. CONCLUSIONS: The concept of DLC appears to have explanatory power in accounting for health outcomes, especially when internal DLC measures of autonomy and self-blame are differentiated. It is important to find educational interventions that work effectively with patients who believe that health outcomes are controlled by chance, because they seem to be at special risk for health-related problems.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the structure and correlates of diabetes-specific locus of control. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Study participants were 165 adult patients from a comprehensive outpatientdiabetes education program who completed a research protocol at the outset of the program. The protocol included measures of diabetes locus of control (DLC), glycemic control, self-care behavior, and emotional well-being. RESULTS: Scales measuring internal and powerful other DLC each had two components. One component of internal DLC, autonomy, was significantly associated with positive outcomes, and the other component, self-blame, was related to negative outcomes. The two components of powerful other DLC were differently correlated with various aspects of strict regimen adherence, and chance DLC was associated with a variety of measures reflecting a pattern of dysfunction. CONCLUSIONS: The concept of DLC appears to have explanatory power in accounting for health outcomes, especially when internal DLC measures of autonomy and self-blame are differentiated. It is important to find educational interventions that work effectively with patients who believe that health outcomes are controlled by chance, because they seem to be at special risk for health-related problems.
Authors: Howard H Moffet; Nancy Adler; Dean Schillinger; Ameena T Ahmed; Barbara Laraia; Joe V Selby; Romain Neugebauer; Jennifer Y Liu; Melissa M Parker; Margaret Warton; Andrew J Karter Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2008-03-07 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: C Nuccitelli; A Valentini; M T Caletti; C Caselli; N Mazzella; G Forlani; G Marchesini Journal: J Endocrinol Invest Date: 2017-08-12 Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: Y Tara Zhang; Barbara A Laraia; Mahasin S Mujahid; Aracely Tamayo; Samuel D Blanchard; E Margaret Warton; N Maggi Kelly; Howard H Moffet; Dean Schillinger; Nancy Adler; Andrew J Karter Journal: Epidemiology Date: 2015-05 Impact factor: 4.822
Authors: Neda Ratanawongsa; Andrew J Karter; Melissa M Parker; Courtney R Lyles; Michele Heisler; Howard H Moffet; Nancy Adler; E Margaret Warton; Dean Schillinger Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2013-02-11 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Courtney R Lyles; Andrew J Karter; Bessie A Young; Clarence Spigner; David Grembowski; Dean Schillinger; Nancy E Adler Journal: J Health Care Poor Underserved Date: 2011-02