Elizabeth Holmes-Truscott, Jessica L. Hateley-Browne, Elizabeth Charalambakis, Adriana D. Ventura, Annette Ripper, Renza Scibilia, Jane Speight
{"title":"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。","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":"{\"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}","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}
Diabetes misconceptions, seriousness, motivation, self-efficacy and stigma: A cross-sectional comparison of eight Australian diabetes communication campaign videos
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.
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.”
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
