Risk accuracy of type 2 diabetes in middle aged adults: Associations with sociodemographic, clinical, psychological and behavioural factors

10Citations
Citations of this article
72Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objective To identify the proportion of individuals with an accurate perception of their risk of type 2 diabetes (T2D) prior to, immediately after and eight weeks after receiving a personalised risk estimate. Additionally, we aimed to explore what factors are associated with underestimation and overestimation immediately post-intervention. Methods Cohort study based on the data collected in the Diabetes Risk Communication Trial. We included 379 participants (mean age 48.9 (SD 7.4) years; 55.1% women) who received a genotypic or phenotypic risk estimate for T2D. Results While only 1.3% of participants perceived their risk accurately at baseline, this increased to 24.7% immediately after receiving a risk estimate and then dropped to 7.3% at eight weeks. Those who overestimated their risk at baseline continued to overestimate it, whereas those who underestimated their risk at baseline improved their risk accuracy. We did not identify any other characteristics associated with underestimation or overestimation immediately after receiving a risk estimate. Conclusion Understanding a received risk estimate is challenging for most participants with many continuing to have inaccurate risk perception after receiving the estimate. Practice implications Individuals who overestimate or underestimate their T2D risk before receiving risk information might require different approaches for altering their risk perception.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Silarova, B., Douglas, F. E., Usher-Smith, J. A., Godino, J. G., & Griffin, S. J. (2018). Risk accuracy of type 2 diabetes in middle aged adults: Associations with sociodemographic, clinical, psychological and behavioural factors. Patient Education and Counseling, 101(1), 43–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2017.07.023

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free