Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
197,768 studies31 sourcesUpdated 45 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BY-NCJournal of diabetes science and technology

Diabetes Distress in Caregivers of Young Children With Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus.

  1. 1Division of Pediatric Endocrinology, Department of Pediatrics, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
  2. 2Department of Behavioral Psychology, Kennedy Krieger Institute, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Abstract

Introduction

The American Diabetes Association recommends screening for diabetes distress in individuals with diabetes and their caregivers. We evaluated the clinical utility of the Problem Areas in Diabetes-Parent Revised version (PAID-PR) distress screener in caregivers of young children with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and examined associations between diabetes distress, demographic and clinical characteristics, and diabetes technology use.Methods

In this prospective survey study, caregivers of children with T1DM aged <8 years completed the PAID-PR during multidisciplinary diabetes clinic visits. The PAID-PR scores and clinical data were collected. Associations between diabetes distress, clinical characteristics, and diabetes technology use were assessed using the Fisher exact, Wilcoxon rank sum, and 2-sample t tests. Distress related to theoretical vs immediate burdens was compared using paired t tests.Results

Thirty caregivers (73.3% mothers) of children with T1DM (mean age [SD] = 5.4y [1.9], 70% non-Hispanic White, 60% commercially insured) completed the PAID-PR. Child median diabetes duration was 1.5 years (interquartile range [IQR] = 0.6, 2.3), median HbA1c 7.6% (IQR = 6.9, 8.1). All children used continuous glucose monitors, 73.3% Omnipod 5, 6.7% Tandem Mobi, and 20% multiple daily injections. The median distress score was 30.6/100 (IQR = 22.2, 36.1; the lowest 75th percentile of distress = 24.3 [12.5, 31.9]; the highest 25th percentile = 42.9 [38.6, 52.8]). Scores did not differ by demographics, clinical characteristics, or diabetes technology use. Caregivers indicated significantly greater distress from theoretical vs immediate burdens (P < .0001).Conclusions

Caregivers of young children with T1DM experience greater distress related to anticipated future (theoretical) burdens than with immediate diabetes management. Understanding these distress patterns can help guide psychosocial supports.

Related

  1. Psychosocial Factors Associated with Diabetes Distress Among Adults with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: The Roles of Perceived Social Support and Diabetes Management Self-Efficacy in an Indonesian Outpatient Sample.
    Muhammad Afiif Aziz, Neti Juniarti, Titis Kurniawan +1
    Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapyPeer-reviewedCC BY-NCFull textEndocrinology & metabolismEurope PMC
  2. Disordered Eating Behaviors and Psychological Distress in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Cross-Sectional Study from Tunisia
    Rym Ben Othman, Syrine Trabelsi, Ismail Dergaa +6
    Journal of Clinical MedicinePeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textPsychiatry & mental healthCrossrefEurope PMC
  3. Comparison of dental caries experience and salivary electrolyte parameters among children aged 6-14 years with type 1 diabetes mellitus and healthy controls: An in vivo study
    Pritesh Gawali, Rahul Hegde, Anand Shigli +1
    Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive DentistryPeer-reviewedCC BY-NC-SAFull textGeneral medicineDOAJ
  4. Serum insulin-like growth factor-1 is lower in children with type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus than in a non-diabetic comparison group after adjustment for age and sex: a cross-sectional study
    Yuxia Zhang, Dingding Wang, Wei Song
    Frontiers in PediatricsPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textEndocrinology & metabolismPMC
  5. Comparison of Growth Pattern in Children Conceived by Assisted Reproductive Technology with or without Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Prospective Cohort Study
    Narges Bagheri-Lankarani, Sedigheh Madani, Masoumeh Shahsavand +4
    International Journal of Fertility & SterilityPeer-reviewedCC BY-NC 3.0Full textEndocrinology & metabolismPMC
BibTeX
@article{georges2026diabetes,
  title = {{Diabetes Distress in Caregivers of Young Children With Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus.}},
  author = {Elena D Georges and Neha Parimi and Karen Dimentstein and Elizabeth A Brown and Risa M Wolf},
  journal = {Journal of diabetes science and technology},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.1177/19322968261492339},
  url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42894327},
  note = {CC BY-NC},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Diabetes Distress in Caregivers of Young Children With Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus.
AU  - Elena D Georges
AU  - Neha Parimi
AU  - Karen Dimentstein
AU  - Elizabeth A Brown
AU  - Risa M Wolf
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/18
JO  - Journal of diabetes science and technology
DO  - 10.1177/19322968261492339
UR  - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42894327
AB  - Introduction  The American Diabetes Association recommends screening for diabetes distress in individuals with diabetes and their caregivers. We evaluated the clinical utility of the Problem Areas in Diabetes-Parent Revised version (PAID-PR) distress screener in caregivers of young children with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and examined associations between diabetes distress, demographic and clinical characteristics, and diabetes technology use.Methods  In this prospective survey study, caregivers of children with T1DM aged <8 years completed the PAID-PR during multidisciplinary diabetes clinic visits. The PAID-PR scores and clinical data were collected. Associations between diabetes distress, clinical characteristics, and diabetes technology use were assessed using the Fisher exact, Wilcoxon rank sum, and 2-sample t tests. Distress related to theoretical vs immediate burdens was compared using paired t tests.Results  Thirty caregivers (73.3% mothers) of children with T1DM (mean age [SD] = 5.4y [1.9], 70% non-Hispanic White, 60% commercially insured) completed the PAID-PR. Child median diabetes duration was 1.5 years (interquartile range [IQR] = 0.6, 2.3), median HbA1c 7.6% (IQR = 6.9, 8.1). All children used continuous glucose monitors, 73.3% Omnipod 5, 6.7% Tandem Mobi, and 20% multiple daily injections. The median distress score was 30.6/100 (IQR = 22.2, 36.1; the lowest 75th percentile of distress = 24.3 [12.5, 31.9]; the highest 25th percentile = 42.9 [38.6, 52.8]). Scores did not differ by demographics, clinical characteristics, or diabetes technology use. Caregivers indicated significantly greater distress from theoretical vs immediate burdens (P < .0001).Conclusions  Caregivers of young children with T1DM experience greater distress related to anticipated future (theoretical) burdens than with immediate diabetes management. Understanding these distress patterns can help guide psychosocial supports.
SN  - 1932-2968
ER  -