ArticleCureus2025
Knowledge of Diabetic Complications in Diabetic Patients and Non-diabetic Family Care Givers: An Awareness of Health Promotion Study.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Association Between Fasting Blood Glucose and Myocardial Infarction Risk: Findings From the 2015-2018 NHANES Database and Mendelian Randomization Studies.Cardiology research and practice · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Diabetes mellitus and its complications have a significant impact on patient health and quality of life as they impose substantial burdens on family members. This study aims to explore the awareness levels of diabetic complications among both diabetic patients and their non-diabetic family caregivers. Objectives To assess the level of knowledge and its association with sociodemographic factors concerning diabetes management and complications among diabetic patients and their caregivers. Methodology A cross-sectional, questionnaire-based descriptive study was conducted in the Diabetes Specialty Clinic of a tertiary health care hospital in Pune. The study included diabetic patients attending the OPD as well as inpatients, along with their caregivers. For patients who were not accompanied by their caregivers, information was gathered via telephone. A total of 65 diabetic patients and 65 caregivers were included in the study. Section A of the questionnaire collects demographic information and disease-related information. Section B assessed basic knowledge of diabetic complications, chronic co-morbidities, foot care, and peripheral neuropathy. Participants were also asked about their apprehensions regarding diabetic complications. Data were analysed using SPSS Statistics version 21 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Results The majority of patients and caregivers demonstrated limited awareness of complications associated with sustained hyperglycemia. Only 40 patients (61.5%) and 31 caregivers (47.6%) recognized myocardial infarction (MI) as a possible outcome. Awareness of stroke was similarly low, with 33 patients (50.7%) and eight caregivers (12.3%) identifying it as a risk. Recognition of congestive cardiac failure (CCF) was poorest, with just 30 patients (46.2%) and nine caregivers (13.8%) aware of its link to prolonged high blood sugar levels. Patients had higher knowledge scores compared to caregivers, indicating a need for targeted educational interventions for family caregivers especially towards monitoring regular sugar, adherence to treatment and lifestyle modification. Conclusion The results highlight significant gaps in knowledge and underscore the influence of socio-demographic factors on diabetes management and awareness. These findings can inform the development of targeted health promotion strategies aimed at improving diabetes care and preventing complications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.