- Browse by Author
Browsing by Author "Driscoll, Kimberly A."
Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Consensus guidance for monitoring individuals with islet autoantibody-positive pre-stage 3 type 1 diabetes(Springer, 2024-09) Phillip, Moshe; Achenbach, Peter; Addala, Ananta; Albanese-O'Neill, Anastasia; Battelino, Tadej; Bell, Kirstine J.; Besser, Rachel E. J.; Bonifacio, Ezio; Colhoun, Helen M.; Couper, Jennifer J.; Craig, Maria E.; Danne, Thomas; de Beaufort, Carine; Dovc, Klemen; Driscoll, Kimberly A.; Dutta, Sanjoy; Ebekozien, Osagie; Elding Larsson, Helena; Feiten, Daniel J.; Frohnert, Brigitte I.; Gabbay, Robert A.; Gallagher, Mary P.; Greenbaum, Carla J.; Griffin, Kurt J.; Hagopian, William; Haller, Michael J.; Hendrieckx, Christel; Hendriks, Emile; Holt, Richard I. G.; Hughes, Lucille; Ismail, Heba M.; Jacobsen, Laura M.; Johnson, Suzanne B.; Kolb, Leslie E.; Kordonouri, Olga; Lange, Karin; Lash, Robert W.; Lernmark, Åke; Libman, Ingrid; Lundgren, Markus; Maahs, David M.; Marcovecchio, M. Loredana; Mathieu, Chantal; Miller, Kellee M.; O'Donnell, Holly K.; Oron, Tal; Patil, Shivajirao P.; Pop-Busui, Rodica; Rewers, Marian J.; Rich, Stephen S.; Schatz, Desmond A.; Schulman-Rosenbaum, Rifka; Simmons, Kimber M.; Sims, Emily K.; Skyler, Jay S.; Smith, Laura B.; Speake, Cate; Steck, Andrea K.; Thomas, Nicholas P. B.; Tonyushkina, Ksenia N.; Veijola, Riitta; Wentworth, John M.; Wherrett, Diane K.; Wood, Jamie R.; Ziegler, Anette-Gabriele; DiMeglio, Linda A.; Pediatrics, School of MedicineGiven the proven benefits of screening to reduce diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) likelihood at the time of stage 3 type 1 diabetes diagnosis, and emerging availability of therapy to delay disease progression, type 1 diabetes screening programmes are being increasingly emphasised. Once broadly implemented, screening initiatives will identify significant numbers of islet autoantibody-positive (IAb+) children and adults who are at risk of (confirmed single IAb+) or living with (multiple IAb+) early-stage (stage 1 and stage 2) type 1 diabetes. These individuals will need monitoring for disease progression; much of this care will happen in non-specialised settings. To inform this monitoring, JDRF in conjunction with international experts and societies developed consensus guidance. Broad advice from this guidance includes the following: (1) partnerships should be fostered between endocrinologists and primary-care providers to care for people who are IAb+; (2) when people who are IAb+ are initially identified there is a need for confirmation using a second sample; (3) single IAb+ individuals are at lower risk of progression than multiple IAb+ individuals; (4) individuals with early-stage type 1 diabetes should have periodic medical monitoring, including regular assessments of glucose levels, regular education about symptoms of diabetes and DKA, and psychosocial support; (5) interested people with stage 2 type 1 diabetes should be offered trial participation or approved therapies; and (6) all health professionals involved in monitoring and care of individuals with type 1 diabetes have a responsibility to provide education. The guidance also emphasises significant unmet needs for further research on early-stage type 1 diabetes to increase the rigour of future recommendations and inform clinical care.Item Correction to: Consensus guidance for monitoring individuals with islet autoantibody‑positive pre‑stage 3 type 1 diabetes(Springer, 2024) Phillip, Moshe; Achenbach, Peter; Addala, Ananta; Albanese-O'Neill, Anastasia; Battelino, Tadej; Bell, Kirstine J.; Besser, Rachel E. J.; Bonifacio, Ezio; Colhoun, Helen M.; Couper, Jennifer J.; Craig, Maria E.; Danne, Thomas; de Beaufort, Carine; Dovc, Klemen; Driscoll, Kimberly A.; Dutta, Sanjoy; Ebekozien, Osagie; Elding Larsson, Helena; Feiten, Daniel J.; Frohnert, Brigitte I.; Gabbay, Robert A.; Gallagher, Mary P.; Greenbaum, Carla J.; Griffin, Kurt J.; Hagopian, William; Haller, Michael J.; Hendrieckx, Christel; Hendriks, Emile; Holt, Richard I. G.; Hughes, Lucille; Ismail, Heba M.; Jacobsen, Laura M.; Johnson, Suzanne B.; Kolb, Leslie E.; Kordonouri, Olga; Lange, Karin; Lash, Robert W.; Lernmark, Åke; Libman, Ingrid; Lundgren, Markus; Maahs, David M.; Marcovecchio, M. Loredana; Mathieu, Chantal; Miller, Kellee M.; O'Donnell, Holly K.; Oron, Tal; Patil, Shivajirao P.; Pop-Busui, Rodica; Rewers, Marian J.; Rich, Stephen S.; Schatz, Desmond A.; Schulman-Rosenbaum, Rifka; Simmons, Kimber M.; Sims, Emily K.; Skyler, Jay S.; Smith, Laura B.; Speake, Cate; Steck, Andrea K.; Thomas, Nicholas P. B.; Tonyushkina, Ksenia N.; Veijola, Riitta; Wentworth, John M.; Wherrett, Diane K.; Wood, Jamie R.; Ziegler, Anette-Gabriele; DiMeglio, Linda A.; Pediatrics, School of MedicineItem COVID-19 Pandemic Effects on Caregivers of Youth With Type 1 Diabetes: Stress and Self-Efficacy(American Diabetes Association, 2022-03-11) Ismail, Heba M.; Hand, Breanne L.; DiMeglio, Linda A.; Oyetoro, Rebecca; Soni, Priya Y.; Adams, Janey; Westen, Sarah; Driscoll, Kimberly A.; Albanese-O’Neill, Anastasia; Pediatrics, School of MedicineBackground Little is known about the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic’s psychological effects on caregivers of children with type 1 diabetes. Objective This study aimed to investigate the experience of caregivers of youth with type 1 diabetes during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods A 49-item questionnaire using a 5-point Likert scale and open-response questions was distributed via e-mail and type 1 diabetes–related social media platforms from 4 May to 22 June 2020. Quantitative data were analyzed using SPSS v.25 statistical software. Descriptive statistics were used. Relationships were compared using Pearson correlation. Qualitative data were coded and categorized. Results A total of 272 caregivers participated (mean ± SD respondent age 42.1 ± 7.8 years; 94.5% females; 81.3% with college degree or higher; 52.6% with annual income >$99,000; 80.1% with private insurance). The mean ± SD age of caregivers’ children with type 1 diabetes was 11.0 ± 4.1 years, and their mean ± SD diabetes duration was 4.2 ± 3.5 years. Participants reported being diagnosed with or knowing someone with COVID-19 (24.6%), increased stress (71.9%), job loss (10.3%), and financial difficulty (26.8%) as a result of the pandemic. General self-efficacy scores were high (mean ± SD 16.2 ± 2.6, range 8–20) and significantly correlated with COVID-19–related self-efficacy (mean ± SD 12.6 ± 2.1; R = 0.394, P <0.001) and type 1 diabetes self-efficacy during COVID-19 (mean ± SD 17.1 ± 2.5; R = 0.421, P <0.001). Conclusion Despite reporting high overall self-efficacy, caregivers of children with type 1 diabetes reported greater overall stress and challenges during the pandemic. Health care providers should be prepared to provide families with specific social and mental health support.Item Optimizing the use of continuous glucose monitoring in young children with type 1 diabetes with an adaptive study design and multiple randomizations(Elsevier, 2019) Berget, Cari; Driscoll, Kimberly A.; Lagges, Ann; Lange, Samantha; DiMeglio, Linda A.; Hannon, Tamara S.; Woerner, Stephanie E.; Iturralde, Esti; Barley, Regan C.; Hanes, Sarah; Hood, Korey K.; Buckingham, Bruce B.; Psychiatry, School of MedicineParents of young children with type 1 diabetes (T1D) experience unique, developmental challenges in managing their child's T1D, resulting in psychosocial distress. Only a small portion of young children reach glucose goals and adherence to diabetes devices that help improve T1D management have historically been low in this population. The purpose of this study is to test four interventions that couple developmentally tailored behavioral supports with education to optimize use of diabetes devices, improve glucose control, and reduce psychosocial distress for parents of young children with T1D. The study team designed four behavioral interventions, two aimed at improving glucose control and two aimed at optimizing use of diabetes devices. The goal of this paper is to describe the behavioral interventions developed for this study, including the results of a pilot test, and describe the methods and analysis plan to test this intervention strategy with ninety participants in a large-scale, randomized trial using a sequential multiple assignment randomization trial (SMART) design. A SMART design will permit a clinically relevant evaluation of the intervention strategy, as it allows multiple randomizations based on individualized assessments throughout the study instead of a fixed intervention dose seen in most traditional randomized controlled trials.