Diabetes misconceptions, seriousness, motivation, self-efficacy and stigma: A cross-sectional comparison of eight Australian diabetes communication campaign videos

IF 3.2 3区医学 Q2 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM

Diabetic Medicine Pub Date : 2024-07-13 DOI:10.1111/dme.15399

Elizabeth Holmes-Truscott, Jessica L. Hateley-Browne, Elizabeth Charalambakis, Adriana D. Ventura, Annette Ripper, Renza Scibilia, Jane Speight

{"title":"Diabetes misconceptions, seriousness, motivation, self-efficacy and stigma: A cross-sectional comparison of eight Australian diabetes communication campaign videos","authors":"Elizabeth Holmes-Truscott, Jessica L. Hateley-Browne, Elizabeth Charalambakis, Adriana D. Ventura, Annette Ripper, Renza Scibilia, Jane Speight","doi":"10.1111/dme.15399","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aim</h3>\n \n <p>This study examines potential intended (attitudes, motivation and self-efficacy) and unintended (stigmatisation of diabetes) consequences of past Australian National Diabetes Week campaign videos. Further, outcomes are compared by the extent to which participants perceived their allocated video as stigmatising diabetes.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>In this cross-sectional, ten-arm study, participants (adults with or without diabetes; 1:2 ratio) were randomly allocated to view one of eight archival diabetes campaign videos (intervention), or either an active or passive control group. Post-exposure, study-specific scales measured diabetes Misconceptions and Seriousness, General and Diabetes Risk-Reduction Motivation and Self-efficacy, and perceptions of video Stigmatisation of diabetes. Scores were compared by condition (intervention vs. control) and by campaign Stigma (highest vs. lowest tertile score), separately by cohort (with or without diabetes).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The sample included <i>n</i> = 1023 without diabetes; and <i>n</i> = 510 with diabetes (79% type 2 diabetes). No significant differences in outcomes were observed between conditions (intervention vs. control), with one exception: a modest effect on General Self-efficacy among those without diabetes only. Those perceiving high campaign Stigma (15%), relative to low Stigma (60%), reported significantly greater diabetes Misconceptions, lower perceived Seriousness and (among those without diabetes only) lower General Motivation but higher Diabetes Risk Reduction Motivation.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Though limited to a single-exposure, we found little meaningful positive influence of past diabetes campaign videos on diabetes attitudes, behavioural intentions or self-efficacy. Further, campaign videos were perceived as stigmatising by a minority—a potential harmful impact. This novel study has implications for the design, implementation and evaluation of future diabetes campaigns.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":11251,"journal":{"name":"Diabetic Medicine","volume":"41 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/dme.15399","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dme.15399","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim

This study examines potential intended (attitudes, motivation and self-efficacy) and unintended (stigmatisation of diabetes) consequences of past Australian National Diabetes Week campaign videos. Further, outcomes are compared by the extent to which participants perceived their allocated video as stigmatising diabetes.

Methods

In this cross-sectional, ten-arm study, participants (adults with or without diabetes; 1:2 ratio) were randomly allocated to view one of eight archival diabetes campaign videos (intervention), or either an active or passive control group. Post-exposure, study-specific scales measured diabetes Misconceptions and Seriousness, General and Diabetes Risk-Reduction Motivation and Self-efficacy, and perceptions of video Stigmatisation of diabetes. Scores were compared by condition (intervention vs. control) and by campaign Stigma (highest vs. lowest tertile score), separately by cohort (with or without diabetes).

Results

The sample included n = 1023 without diabetes; and n = 510 with diabetes (79% type 2 diabetes). No significant differences in outcomes were observed between conditions (intervention vs. control), with one exception: a modest effect on General Self-efficacy among those without diabetes only. Those perceiving high campaign Stigma (15%), relative to low Stigma (60%), reported significantly greater diabetes Misconceptions, lower perceived Seriousness and (among those without diabetes only) lower General Motivation but higher Diabetes Risk Reduction Motivation.

Conclusion

Though limited to a single-exposure, we found little meaningful positive influence of past diabetes campaign videos on diabetes attitudes, behavioural intentions or self-efficacy. Further, campaign videos were perceived as stigmatising by a minority—a potential harmful impact. This novel study has implications for the design, implementation and evaluation of future diabetes campaigns.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

糖尿病的误解、严重性、动机、自我效能和耻辱感：澳大利亚八个糖尿病宣传视频的横向比较。

目的：本研究探讨了以往澳大利亚全国糖尿病周活动视频的潜在预期后果（态度、动机和自我效能）和非预期后果（糖尿病的污名化）。此外，还根据参与者认为其所分配的视频在多大程度上丑化了糖尿病，对结果进行了比较：在这项横断面的十臂研究中，参与者（患有或不患有糖尿病的成年人；1:2 的比例）被随机分配观看八个糖尿病宣传活动视频中的一个（干预组），或主动或被动对照组。暴露后，研究特定的量表测量糖尿病的误解和严重性、一般和糖尿病风险降低动机和自我效能，以及对视频中糖尿病污名化的看法。按条件（干预与对照）和活动污名化（最高分与最低分）对得分进行比较，并按群体（有糖尿病或无糖尿病）分别进行比较：样本包括 n = 1023 名非糖尿病患者；n = 510 名糖尿病患者（79% 为 2 型糖尿病）。在不同条件下（干预与对照），结果无明显差异，但有一个例外：仅对无糖尿病者的一般自我效能感有适度影响。相对于低污名率（60%）而言，那些认为运动污名率高的人（15%）报告的糖尿病误解显著增加，认为严重性较低，（仅在无糖尿病的人群中）一般动机较低，但降低糖尿病风险的动机较高：虽然仅限于单次曝光，但我们发现以往的糖尿病宣传视频对糖尿病态度、行为意向或自我效能的积极影响甚微。此外，少数人认为宣传视频具有侮辱性--这是一种潜在的有害影响。这项新颖的研究对未来糖尿病宣传活动的设计、实施和评估具有重要意义。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Diabetic Medicine 医学-内分泌学与代谢

CiteScore

7.20

自引率

5.70%

发文量

229

审稿时长

3-6 weeks

期刊介绍： Diabetic Medicine, the official journal of Diabetes UK, is published monthly simultaneously, in print and online editions. The journal publishes a range of key information on all clinical aspects of diabetes mellitus, ranging from human genetic studies through clinical physiology and trials to diabetes epidemiology. We do not publish original animal or cell culture studies unless they are part of a study of clinical diabetes involving humans. Categories of publication include research articles, reviews, editorials, commentaries, and correspondence. All material is peer-reviewed. We aim to disseminate knowledge about diabetes research with the goal of improving the management of people with diabetes. The journal therefore seeks to provide a forum for the exchange of ideas between clinicians and researchers worldwide. Topics covered are of importance to all healthcare professionals working with people with diabetes, whether in primary care or specialist services. Surplus generated from the sale of Diabetic Medicine is used by Diabetes UK to know diabetes better and fight diabetes more effectively on behalf of all people affected by and at risk of diabetes as well as their families and carers.”