Publications

Family Ties and Screening Whys: Decisions in Islet Autoantibody Testing for Type 1 Diabetes - T1D Exchange

Written by T1D Exchange | Dec 4, 2024 8:45:00 AM

Hood, K, Agardh, D, Ebekozien, O, Lee, W.-N., Melin, J, Wieloch, M, Sims, E

Introduction: Factors influencing screening could inform approaches to engaging families to screen for T1D. Objective: Among families with a history of T1D, we explored influences on caregiver decision making to screen children for T1D risk. Methods: An exploratory, online survey of families with a history of T1D was completed by adults age ≥ 20 years with children between the ages of 8 – 17 years. Caregivers were recruited from a digital health measurement and engagement platform. Survey themes addressed access to care, trust in healthcare professionals and system, beliefs in screening value, screening anxiety, and general wellness behaviors. Chi-square and t-tests assessed comparisons between those who screened and those who did not. Logistic regression identified the main predictors for screening with screening status as the outcome. P-values are adjusted for groupwise false discovery rate Results: 482 caregivers (232 who screened, 250 did not) were identified from potential participants who completed a prior survey on experiences with T1D, with mean age 40.6 years (SD 6.7), 356 (73.9%) females, 345 White (71.6%). Children with first degree relatives with T1D were more frequently screened than those without (31.5% vs 17.6%, p = 0.01). Caregivers who screened had higher thematic scores believing the value of screening (mean 4.3 vs 3.6= 0.01). They also reported less favorable self-health (16.8% vs 6.8% for “Fair” health, 32.3% vs 44% for “Very Good” health
respectively, p = 0.03 for health states) and lower educational levels, (55.6% vs 70%, p = 0.03 for educational strata). The figure below shows the main predictors in the multivariate model Conclusions: In a population of caregivers participating in digital health monitoring, a collection of sociodemographic, objective health indicators, and attitudes differentiated those who had their children screened versus those who did not. Click here to read the full abstract (O-62)