Show simple item record

Patient Knowledge Compared With National Guidelines for Diabetes Care

dc.contributor.authorTeza, Susanen_US
dc.contributor.authorDavis, Wayne K.en_US
dc.contributor.authorHiss, Rolanden_US
dc.date.accessioned2010-04-14T14:20:37Z
dc.date.available2010-04-14T14:20:37Z
dc.date.issued1988en_US
dc.identifier.citationTeza, Susan; Davis, Wayne; Hiss, Roland (1988). "Patient Knowledge Compared With National Guidelines for Diabetes Care." The Diabetes Educator 14(3): 207-211. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/69139>en_US
dc.identifier.issn0145-7217en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/69139
dc.description.abstractData collected on a randomly selected group of 428 patients with insulin-dependent and noninsulin-dependent diabetes from 61 physician practices in eight Michigan communities were compared with national standards for diabetes patient knowledge. Comparisons were performed using a standardized Diabetes Knowledge Test (DKT) and selected items from the Diabetes Education Profile (DEP). Patient performance on these instruments was compared with corresponding items in the Ambulatory Care Facilities section of the Guide lines for Diabetes Care published by the American Diabetes Associ ation and the American Associ ation of Diabetes Educators. In general, insulin-dependent persons scored higher than noninsulin-dependent persons. Those taking insulin (whether insulin-dependent or not) scored higher than noninsulin-dependent persons whose regimen did not include insulin. The findings emphasize the need to subdivide any analysis of clinical diabetes or diabetes education into groups based on insulin use or nonuse.en_US
dc.format.extent3108 bytes
dc.format.extent426153 bytes
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.publisherSage Publicationsen_US
dc.titlePatient Knowledge Compared With National Guidelines for Diabetes Careen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelFamily Medicine and Primary Careen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelInternal Medicine and Specialitiesen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumMichigan Diabetes Research and Training Center The University of Michigan Medical School Ann Arbor, Michiganen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumMichigan Diabetes Research and Training Center The University of Michigan Medical School Ann Arbor, Michiganen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumMichigan Diabetes Research and Training Center The University of Michigan Medical School Ann Arbor, Michiganen_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/69139/2/10.1177_014572178801400312.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/014572178801400312en_US
dc.identifier.sourceThe Diabetes Educatoren_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGuidelines for diabetes care. New York and Pitman, New Jersey: American Diabetes Association and American Association of Diabetes Educators. 1981.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHess GE, Davis WK The validation of a diabetes patient knowledge test. Diabetes Care 1983;6:591-96.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDavis WK, Hull A., Boutaugh ML Factors affecting the educational diagnosis of diabetic patients. Diabetes Care 1981;4:275-78.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHiss RG, Lengyel MC, Hess GE, Bowbeer LA, eds. Diabetes in communities. Ann Arbor: Michigan Diabetes Research and Training Center, 1986.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBeaser SB Teaching the diabetic patient. Diabetes 1956 ;5: 146-49.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEtzwiler DD What the juvenile diabetic knows about his disease. Pediatrics 1962;29:135.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEtzwiler DD, Sines L. Juvenile diabetes and its management: family, social and academic implications. JAMA 1962;181:304.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCollier B., Etzwiler DD Comparative study of diabetes knowledge among juvenile diabetics and their parents. Diabetes 1971;20:51-57.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.