Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Introduction

There is evidence of the relationship between psychosocial distress and elevated blood glucose levels. However, data in the Dominican Republic is limited. The study aims to measure the prevalence of four types of psychosocial distress, assess their associations with A1c levels and stratify these associations by gender among rural Dominican adults with diabetes.

Methods

Between June-July 2023, 501 diabetes patients participated in a cross-sectional survey measuring psychosocial distress (e.g., diabetes distress, depressive symptoms, acute stress, anxiety). Descriptive analyses were conducted to determine prevalence of psychosocial distress, linear regression was run on psychosocial distress and A1c levels, and logistic regression was run to examine psychosocial distress levels by gender.

Results

Participants reported mild-to-moderate levels of psychosocial distress. Almost a fifth of participants reported high levels of depressive symptoms (20.2%) and acute stress (22.0%). Only diabetes distress was significantly associated with A1c levels (b = 0.037, SE = 0.009, p = 0.001). Men were significantly less likely to report moderate-to-severe depressive symptoms (OR:2.35; CI:1.51–3.66), anxiety (OR:3.07; CI:1.52–6.19), and acute stress (OR:2.13; CI:1.51–3.66) than women.

Conclusion

Prevalence of psychosocial distress varies by type, and severity varies by gender. Diabetes distress is associated with diabetes outcomes. Findings highlight the importance of addressing psychological distress and mental health in the context of diabetes care.

Keywords

type 2 diabetes diabetes distress stress depression anxiety Dominican Republic

Purpose

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a chronic condition caused by insufficient insulin production by the pancreas and resistance to the effect of insulin in the body (World Health Organization, 2023). T2DM is characterized by hyperglycemia, or raised blood glucose, and when not managed can lead to health complications such as coronary artery disease, stroke, vision loss, nephropathy, neuropathy, and amputations (Goyal et al., 2023). These health outcomes are linked to increased morbidity and mortality, and can require advanced and expensive medical care (Mayo Clinic, 2023).

The World Health Organization estimates that 442 million people live with diabetes globally, of which 95% is T2DM (World Health Organization, 2023). According to the Global Burden of Disease Study, approximately 6.3% of the world's population lives with T2DM (Khan et al., 2020). The Dominican Republic, a Caribbean country, is experiencing increasing burden of chronic, noncommunicable diseases such as T2DM (Armora Langoni et al., 2025), a shared occurrence across many countries in the region. An estimated 10–12% of Dominican adults have T2DM (Soto et al., 2025). T2DM is the eighth top cause of death in the Dominican Republic, and is a risk factor for heart disease, the top cause of death in the country (World Health Organization, 2024). Despite the significant proportion of adults living with T2DM, there are several structural barriers to access appropriate care. Specifically, the Dominican Republic is a country with some of the highest medical out-of-pocket costs across Latin America and the Caribbean, making costs a barrier to managing conditions such as T2DM (Wallace et al., 2023). Additionally, diabetes care is typically concentrated in major urban centers in the country, thus individuals living in rural areas experience disproportionately poor access to diabetes-related care (Castro et al., 2018).

In general for adults living with T2DM, management of elevated blood glucose levels includes taking medications, such as metformin or insulin injections, and other medications to manage co-occurring conditions such as high blood pressure and high cholesterol (World Health Organization, 2023). In addition to biomedical interventions, other management strategies include regular check-ups with medical practitioners (i.e., physicians, nutritionists, diabetes educators, pharmacists), self-monitoring of blood glucose levels, adapting dietary behaviors, and engaging in more or different forms of physical activity (NIDDK, 2023).

The ability of adults to manage T2DM is influenced by psychosocial distress (Chima et al., 2021; Ehrmann et al., 2024). Psychosocial distress is defined broadly as the tendency to experience stress, negative events, and a general negative outlook on life (Henderson et al., 2013), and encompasses various psychosocial experiences such as depressive symptoms, stress, and anxiety – all of which are associated with poorer T2DM management (Chlebowy et al., 2019). For example, studies conducted in the United States (US) among Latino adults with T2DM found that depressive symptoms were associated with worse glycemic control and increased mortality (Cardenas et al., 2017; Colon et al., 2013; Leyva et al., 2011). In a study of older Puerto Rican adults, T2DM prevalence was significantly higher among adults with major depression compared to adults without major depression (POR = 1.59, p < 0.001) (Disdier-Flores, 2010). Acute (i.e., short-term) and chronic (i.e., long-term) forms of stress are both associated with hormonal and behavioral changes, which each can affect glucose levels (Dungan et al., 2009; Kyrou & Tsigos, 2009; Sharma & Singh, 2020). In a study with US Latinos, including Dominicans, chronic stress was associated with higher prevalence of diabetes [OR = 1.20, (95%CI: 1.11–1.31)], and acute stress was associated with changes in adaptive behaviors such as engagement in smoking [OR = 1.03 (95%CI: 1.01–1.19)] (Gallo et al., 2014). Anxiety is also associated with poor metabolic outcomes for those with T2DM (Bickett & Tapp, 2016). Metanalyses with data primarily from the US and Europe, have found that diabetes is associated with anxiety disorders and elevated anxiety symptoms [pooled OR = 1.22, (95%CI: 1.11–1.32)] (Smith et al., 2013). Fewer data are available on anxiety, particularly among Latin American and Caribbean populations.

While depressive symptoms, anxiety, and acute stress are general forms of psychosocial distress that are associated with T2DM outcomes there are, however, forms of distress that account for the specificity of living with T2DM. Specifically, diabetes distress refers to the medical, social, and psychological challenges with managing diabetes (Polonsky et al., 2005; Verdecias et al., 2023). It is estimated that 30–50% of people living with diabetes experience diabetes distress (CDC, 2024). Studies have found strong evidence of the association between diabetes distress and poor self-management (Emery et al., 2022), increased diabetes-related complications (Bruno et al., 2019), elevated hemoglobin A1c (A1c) (Hendrieckx et al., 2021), poorer engagement in medication adherence (Hessler et al., 2017), poor dietary quality, and reduced likelihood of physical activity (Bruno et al., 2019). Prior qualitative studies have shown that the emotional burden of managing T2DM is present for adults in rural Dominican Republic. This prior qualitative work highlighted that the manifestation of diabetes distress can vary based on gender with women reporting experiencing depressive symptoms, stress, and anxiety more often than men (Gonzalez Rodriguez et al., 2018). In addition, the availability of social support in and outside of the home, consistent engagement with medical care, and availability of recommended foods all influenced feelings of diabetes distress, which can vary by gender (Gonzalez Rodriguez et al., 2018; Wallace et al., 2019).

As understanding of the role of psychosocial distress for adults managing T2DM in the Caribbean is limited, we aimed to provide data to address that gap. Our primary aims were to first, measure the prevalence of four different types of psychosocial distress, specifically diabetes distress, depressive symptoms, anxiety, and acute stress, among Dominican adults with T2DM residing in rural areas. Second, to assess the association of each psychosocial distress measure with A1c levels among our Dominican sample and finally stratify these associations by gender. Findings will highlight areas to target for future programs aimed at improving quality of life for adults living with diabetes in similar contexts.

Methods

Research Setting and Study Design. This study was conducted in two community clinics in the rural, agricultural center of the Dominican Republic, known as the Cibao Valley, which extends from the northwest to the south-central part of the country (Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1998). To address inaccessibility of diabetes care in the Cibao Valley region, in 2010 a US-based nonprofit addressing diabetes and high blood pressure in developing countries, Chronic Care International (CCI), collaborated with the Institute for Latin American Concern (ILAC)—a Dominican non-governmental organization—to create a rural diabetes and hypertension program serving individuals from more than 30 rural communities in the Cibao Valley. Additional information regarding the collaboration was previously published (Walker et al., 2018). To date, there are 1,200 adult patients enrolled in the CCI-ILAC diabetes and hypertension program, of which approximately 800 live with T2DM. The diabetes and hypertension program provides low-cost (US$15 per month) chronic disease, services including health education, monthly or quarterly physician visits at either of their two clinics, and medications for T2DM and co-morbidities such as hypertension and hyperlipidemia.

The study design employed was a cross-sectional quantitative study in which all data collection occurred at one timepoint. This study was informed by results of previous qualitative studies conducted in these Dominican communities and with our ILAC-CCI partners. Since 2015, our research team has conducted qualitative studies exploring social support (Wallace et al., 2019), stress (Gonzalez Rodriguez et al., 2018), scoping strategies (Sadeghzadeh et al., 2021), and provider experiences of providing emotional support to program participants (Wallace, Núñez et al., 2022).

Recruitment and Data Collection. Participant inclusion criteria were 18 years or older, a confirmed T2DM diagnosis, and being a patient in the diabetes and hypertension program. We implemented a census sampling strategy, in which we recruited and consented all eligible patients who came into both clinics each day between June-July 2023. The clinic's community health workers announced the study to their patients at the start of the clinic day, thereafter the research team invited each patient to learn about the study in a private location, and if they were interested, verbally consented the participant. Participant data were collected using RedCap on encrypted tablets. Researchers verbally administered the survey to each participant to ensure accessibility for a wide range of literacy levels and consistency in the data collection mode. Data collection lasted between 20–45 min per participant. All recruitment and data collection activities were completed in Spanish. Data were reviewed daily for quality assurance.

Research team members from the university (DDW, QBN, TA, KH, RD) are bilingual (Spanish and English), of Latin American descent, and were trained in informed consent, the survey tool, and data quality assurance before the start of data collection. Research team members resided in the participating communities throughout the data collection period. All materials were written in Spanish by the first author. This study was approved by the UNC Institutional Review Board (#23–0568).

Measures . The survey contained measures of psychosocial distress (depressive symptoms, anxiety, acute stress, and diabetes distress), biomedical and health measures, and demographic characteristics.

Depressive Symptoms. We used the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression 10-item Scale (CESD-10). Studies have found that the CESD-10 is acceptably reliable (alpha >0.80) and valid for Spanish-speaking populations, including those from the Dominican Republic (González et al., 2020). Items include “I was bothered by things that usually don’t bother me,” “I felt that everything I did was an effort,” and “I was happy.” Responses range from (1) rarely or none of the time, to (4) all of the time. We assessed two levels of depressive symptoms with scores under 10 indicating moderate depressive symptoms, and scores 10 or higher as greater severity of symptoms (Björgvinsson et al., 2013). For this study, the omega coefficient value is 0.72.

Anxiety. We used the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item Scale (GAD-7). The GAD-7 is highly utilized in Latin America and the Caribbean, and studies have demonstrated consistently high reliability (omega coefficient >0.91) and validity across Spanish-speaking populations, including the Dominican Republic (López et al., 2025a, 2025b). Items include “feeling nervous, anxious or on edge,” and “trouble relaxing.” Responses range from (0) not at all to (3) nearly every day. Scores range from 0–4 (minimal anxiety), 5–9 (mild anxiety), 10–14 (moderate anxiety), and ≥15 (severe anxiety) (Spitzer et al., 2006). The omega coefficient for the GAD-7 is 0.66 for this study.

Acute Stress. We used the Perceived Stress 4-item Scale (PSS-4) measuring acute stress in the last month. Reliability and validity across populations, including in Latin America and the Caribbean, are well reported for the PSS (Vallejo et al., 2018). Reliability scores are acceptable (alpha >0.70, omega >0.75), and construct validity is high for English and Spanish speakers (Baik et al., 2019; Ruisoto et al., 2020). Items include “how often have you felt that you were unable to control the important things in your life?” and “how often have you felt confident about your ability to handle your personal problems?” Responses range from (0) never to (4) very often. Mean stress scores ≥6 classify as high levels of stress (Ingram et al., 2016). The omega coefficient for the PSS-4 is 0.60.

Diabetes Distress. The Diabetes Distress 19-item Scale (DDS-19) was adapted for use in the Dominican Republic (Wallace, Pereira et al., 2022). The DDS has been used in multiple Spanish-speaking countries and regions including Spain, Mexico, South America, and among Spanish-speakers in the US (Martinez-Vega et al., 2016; Peña-Purcell et al., 2019; Duarte-Díaz et al., 2022). The adapted DDS-19 is comprised of four subdomains: emotional distress, interpersonal distress, physician distress, and regimen distress. Items included “feeling angry, scared, and/or depressed when I think about living with diabetes” and “feeling that friends or family don’t give me the emotional support that I would like.” Responses ranged from (1) not a problem to (5) a very serious problem. Mean scores of 2–2.9 or higher indicate moderate distress, and scores of 3 or higher indicate high level of distress (Fisher et al., 2012). The omega coefficient for the DDS-19 in the study is 0.60.

Biomedical and Health Measures. We collected information on the most recently recorded hemoglobin A1c (A1c) and blood pressure (i.e., systolic and diastolic). A1c is a measure of average blood sugar levels over the previous three months (American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee, 2024). Below 5.7% is normal, 5.7–6.4% is elevated blood glucose (i.e., prediabetes), and 6.5% and higher indicates diabetes mellitus (Cheng et al., 2011). All A1c measures were collected using a National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program certified device. We recorded self-reported use of cholesterol medication, alcohol, and tobacco use.

Demographics. We collected age, gender, highest level of education completed (in years), number of adults in the household, number of children or adolescents in the household, marital status, and years since diabetes diagnosis.

Analysis. The data were cleaned and analyzed using SAS, version 9.4 (Cary, NC). All continuous variables were tested for normality using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test and assessed for skewness and kurtosis. For demographic and clinical characteristics, a descriptive analysis was done. Continuous variables are shown as the mean and standard deviation, while categorical variables are presented as frequency and percentages. Bivariate correlations were used to assess significant associations across variables and to determine multicollinearity.

We conducted linear regression to determine the unadjusted association between psychosocial distress measures and A1c. We ran age-adjusted linear models to account for age, the greatest risk factor for T2DM, and logistic regression for the level of diabetes distress, acute stress, depressive symptoms, and anxiety levels between minimal compared to moderate-to-severe forms of distress. This analysis was stratified by gender to quantitively examine patterns reported in prior qualitative studies (Gonzalez Rodriguez et al., 2018; Wallace et al., 2019).

Results

Description of the Sample. We recruited 501 patients across the two clinics. Mean age was 62 years old, with a little over half of patients identifying as women (53.3%) (Table 1). Two-thirds of participants reported having some or completing primary school, which is the 8^th grade. Approximately 63.2% of participants indicated that they were partnered in either a marriage or a civil union.

Table 1.

Participant Demographics.

		Mean ± SD
Age	n (%)	62.0 ± 10.8
Gender
Man	234 (46.7)
Woman	267 (53.3)
Education
None	54 (10.8)
Primary School	339 (67.7)
Secondary/High School	51 (10.2)
At Least Some College	53 (10.6)
Marital Status
Married	138 (27.5)
Union	179 (35.7)
Widowed	43 (8.6)
Separated	22 (4.4)
Single	119 (23.75)
Years Since Diabetes Diagnosis		11.2 ± 8.0
A1c Level (%)		8.0 ± 1.7
Blood Pressure Medication	394 (78.6)
Cholesterol Medication	404 (80.6)
Health Status
Very good	10 (2.0)
Good	177 (35.3)
Average	293 (58.5)
Bad	19 (3.8)
Very bad	2 (0.4)
Depressive Symptoms		6.35 ± 5.26
Minimal-to-moderate	398 (79.4)
High	101 (20.2)
Missing	2 (0.4)
AnxietyMinimal	364 (72.7)	3.17 ± 3.81
Mild	84 (16.7)
Moderate	37 (7.4)
Severe	9 (1.8)
Acute Stress		3.54 ± 2.56
Minimal-to-moderate	379 (75.7)
High	110 (22.0)
Diabetes Distress		1.29 ± 0.34
Minimal	438 (87.4)
Moderate	19 (3.8)
Severe	2 (0.4)

Participants self-reported living with T2DM for an average of 11 years and mean A1c levels of 8.0 ± 1.7 (range: 4.8–14.0%). Most participants self-reported blood pressure medication use (78.6%) and cholesterol medication use (80.6%) and described their health status as average (58.8%).

Prevalence of Psychosocial Distress. Mental health indicators were varied, with minimal-to-moderate depressive symptoms reported by 79.4% of patients and high levels of depressive symptoms by 20.2%. Nearly three-quarters (72.7%) of participants reported minimal anxiety, 16.7% mild, and the remaining moderate-to-severe anxiety (9.2%). Acute stress was primarily minimal-to-moderate (75.7%), with about 22.0% indicating that they experienced high levels of stress. Most participants (87.4%) reported minimal diabetes distress with only 3.4% and 0.4% reporting moderate or severe diabetes distress, respectively.

Correlations of Psychosocial Distress Measures. All forms of psychosocial distress (diabetes distress, depressive symptoms, anxiety, acute stress) were significantly correlated with one another; but not multicollinear, suggesting that psychosocial distress variables are related yet distinct (Table 2). Correlation values ranged from 0.44–0.69 and each psychosocial distress measure was statistically significant at less than 0.001. Each distress variable was evaluated against clinical A1c levels, and only diabetes distress was significantly correlated with A1c (r = 0.19; p < 0.001).

Table 2.

Correlations Between Psychosocial Distress Variables and A1c Levels.

	Diabetes Distress (DDS-19)	Depressive Symptoms (CESD-10)	Anxiety (GAD-7)	Perceived Stress (PSS-4)	A1C levels
Diabetes Distress (DDS-19)	1.00	0.50 <.0001 457	0.44 <.0001 456	0.45 <.0001 449	0.19 <.0001 453
Depressive Symptoms (CESD-10)	–	1.00	0.69 <.0001 492	0.58 <.0001 487	0.03 0.54 493
Anxiety (GAD-7)	–	–	1.00	0.57 <.0001 483	−0.01 0.85 488
Acute Stress (PSS-4)	–	–	–	1.00	0.02 0.70 483
A1c levels (%)	–	–	–	–	1.00

Associations between Psychosocial Distress and A1c. In the unadjusted linear regression assessing associations between psychosocial distress measures and A1c, only diabetes distress was significantly and positively associated with A1c levels (i.e., as diabetes distress values increase, A1c values increase) (Table 3). When controlling for age, every additional point in diabetes distress was associated with 0.037 percentage points in A1c (b = 0.037, SE = 0.009, p = 0.001). Controlling for age and gender, diabetes distress was associated with increased A1c levels (b = 0.036, SE = 0.009, p = 0.001). This pattern of positive association between diabetes distress and A1c levels remained even when controlling for age, gender, and marital status (b = 0.037, SE = 0.009, p = 0.001).

Table 3.

Associations Between Psychosocial Distress Measures and A1c.

	Model 1: Unadjusted Model	Model 2: Adjusted for Age	Model 3: Adjusted for Age and Gender	Model 4: Adjusted for Age, Gender, Marital Status
Type	b (SE)
Diabetes Distress	0.037 (0.009)*	0.037 (0.009)*	0.036 (0.009)*	0.037 (0.009)*
Depressive Symptoms	0.080 (0.138)	0.099 (0.139)	0.079 (0.135)	0.092 (0.136)
Anxiety	−0.019 (0.102)	−0.034 (0.102)	−0.048 (0.101)	−0.05 (0.101)
Acute Stress	0.026 (0.068)	0.008 (0.011)	0.013 (0.067)	0.021 (0.068)

* = indicates statistically significant at the p < 0.05 level

In the analyses stratified by gender, A1c levels were not statistically different between women (mean=8.06%) and men (mean=7.85%). Diabetes distress was minimal for 95% of both women and men. A significantly greater proportion of women indicated high levels of anxiety than men; specifically, for moderate and severe levels of anxiety (13.31% versus 4.76%, p < .05). Twice as many women than men scored at moderate-to-severe depressive symptoms (30.08% versus 15.45%, p < 0.05). A similar pattern was observed for women compared to men when examining reported high levels of acute stress (28.46% versus 15.74%, p < 0.05).

We examined diabetes distress variables across gender. Overall, men reported less diabetes distress than women. There was no difference in the likelihood of men or women reporting minimal diabetes distress compared to moderate-to-severe distress. When compared to women, men were 2.13 times more likely to report minimal acute stress than moderate-to-severe acute stress (OR: 2.13; CI: 1.36–3.33). Similarly, men were 2.35 times more likely to report minimal depressive symptoms than moderate-to-severe depressive symptoms than women (OR: 2.35; CI: 1.51–3.66). Finally, men were over three times more likely to report minimal levels of anxiety than moderate-to-severe levels of anxiety than women (OR: 3.07; CI: 1.52–6.19). In the adjusted models, there were no significant differences between men and women reporting minimal versus moderate-to-severe levels of any of the four forms of distress (Table 4).

Table 4.

Odds Ratios for Diabetes Distress, Acute Stress, Depressive Symptoms and Anxiety by Gender.

	Minimal	Moderate to Severe	Odds Ratio (95%CI)	aOR (95%CI)
DiabetesDistressMenWomen	205 (95.35%)233 (95.49%)	10 (4.65)11 (4.51%)	0.97 (0.40–2.32)	0.95 (0.39–2.28)
Acute StressMenWomen	193 (85.28%)186 (71.54%)	36 (15.72%)74 (28.46%)	2.13 (1.36–3.33)*	0.99 (0.97–1.01)
Depressive SymptomsMenWomen	197 (84.55%)186 (69.92%)	36 (15.45%)80 (30.08%)	2.35 (1.51–3.66)*	1.01 (0.99–1.02)
AnxietyMenWomen	220 (95.24%)228 (88.69%)	11 (4.76%)35 (13.31%)	3.07 (1.52–6.19)*	0.96 (0.96–1.01)

aOR = adjusted by age

* = indicates statistically significant at the p < 0.05 level

We ran adjusted odds ratios for the four diabetes distress subdomains (emotional, interpersonal, physician, regimen). For all subdomains, men were more likely to report minimal levels of distress compared to women. However, no association was significant.

Discussion

The aims of this study were to measure the prevalence of different types of psychosocial distress, and to assess the associations for each type of psychosocial distress variable with A1c levels among adults living with T2DM in the rural Dominican Republic. We further examined the associations between each form of psychosocial distress and A1c stratified these associations by gender. Overall, most participants reported minimal levels of depressive symptoms, anxiety, acute stress, and diabetes distress. The highest reported severe symptoms were depressive symptoms (20.2%) and acute stress (22.0%). Whereas participants reported low levels of severe anxiety (1.8%) and diabetes distress (0.4%). The low levels of diabetes distress may be due to all participants having consistent access to diabetes-specific care.

Almost one-fifth of participants in our study (20.2%) reported high levels of depressive symptoms, which is in line with other published studies (Aschner et al., 2021). A review of T2DM in the rural US noted that for adults with depression, medication non-adherence was higher among rural Latino patients than urban Latino patients (Dugani et al., 2021). Clinically significant depression is present in one in four people with T2DM and studies have found that depression increases the risk of hyperglycemia, insulin resistance, and diabetes-related complications (Semenkovich et al., 2015). Although we did not find an association between depressive symptom severity and A1c, studies have shown that living with T2DM increases the risk of depression and can contribute to more severe depression (Mukherjee & Chaturvedi, 2019; Semenkovich et al., 2015). A 2021 community-based study examining depressive symptoms and incident T2DM among 30,360 adults, reported that elevated depressive symptoms using the Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9) was associated with a 17% increased risk of T2DM (Graham et al., 2021). The study also found that a diagnosis of depression was associated with a 20% increased risk of T2DM (Graham et al., 2021). In our study the proportion of women reporting moderate-to-severe depressive symptoms was over double the proportion of men. This is in line with our previous qualitative work which described differences in received social support in the home between men and women, with women feeling less familial support to manage their diabetes thereby contributing to feelings of depression (Wallace et al., 2019). Our results reflect studies noting gender differences related to depression and diabetes among US Latinos (Mansyur et al., 2016, 2021), in Mexico (Agudelo-Botero et al., 2022), Puerto Rico (Bell et al., 2017), and in countries in South America (Aschner et al., 2021).

We also found that women endorsed higher levels of anxiety symptoms than men. Research on the role of anxiety on diabetes management is limited, particularly in Latin America. While studies have shown that anxiety is associated with diabetes (Wilczynska et al., 2022), a Multi-ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) study examining the association between anxiety and incident T2DM found that anxiety did not predict T2DM (Abraham et al., 2015). Participants in a 2018 qualitative study in the Dominican Republic explained that they experience “ansiedad para comer” or the desire to eat when they are anxious (Gonzalez Rodriguez et al., 2018). Further, they contrasted anxiety with depression, which they tied to feelings of ennui and a lack of appetite. Additional studies are needed to better understand how anxiety affects diabetes management among Latin American and the Caribbean adults.

Our study examined acute stress and found that approximately 22% of participants endorsed experiencing moderate-to-severe levels of acute stress, although acute stress was not associated with A1c levels. Different forms of stress can produce different behaviors. Findings from Gallo et al. (2014) suggested that acute stress was associated with higher smoking behaviors but chronic—or long-term stress—was associated with heart disease, stroke, and diabetes risk among US Latinos (Gallo et al., 2014).

Despite the high proportion of minimal diabetes distress, when examining associations and psychosocial distress and A1c, only diabetes distress was associated with higher blood glucose levels. Studies among primarily Puerto Ricans in the US showed that compared to depressive symptoms, reductions in diabetes distress were associated with a clinically significant reduction in A1c levels (m = 0.55%, SD = 0.06%) (Leyva et al., 2011).This suggests that there are health implications for adults, regardless of gender, with T2DM even at minimal-to-moderate levels of diabetes distress. When examining the subdomains of diabetes distress, interpersonal and emotional distress were the most endorsed by participants. The association between diabetes distress and A1c has been noted in other studies. A 2018 study in the United Kingdom reported that regimen-related distress was the strongest predictor of glycemic control measured by A1c (Martinez et al., 2018).

There are several implications of this study for research and practice. There has been a rising consensus among researchers and health providers on the need to address emotional and mental health to improve diabetes outcomes (Matlock et al., 2024). Results of this study may support clinical practice by informing ways to integrate individualized and tailored conversations between providers and patients. For example, clinics can integrate psychosocial measures to gain a better understanding of the emotional and mental health of their diabetes patients and adjust diabetes management conversations around the relevant forms of psychosocial distress. At clinical and community levels, evidence of psychosocial distress can support health education efforts and coping interventions to address psychosocial distress and its impact on diabetes management. Clinically, interventions can include screening patients for psychosocial comorbidities to adequately treat them for conditions like depression, which in turn may affect management of T2DM. Community-level interventions can include the expansion of the stress modules in Diabetes Education Programs to support diabetes management that is inclusive of emotional and mental health.

Future directions of this research include additional validation studies for the adapted diabetes distress scale for use in the Dominican Republic and extend its use into other nearby Spanish-speaking Caribbean countries. As we cannot assess causality in this study, an extension of this study involves using a longitudinal cohort design to investigate to what extent psychosocial distress affects diabetes-related behaviors (i.e., diet, physical activity, medication adherence) and A1c over time. Additionally, studies are needed to parse out the mechanisms by which each type of psychosocial distress affects the biological and behavioral factors associated with A1c levels.

Study strengths include collaborating with long-standing partners to develop research questions that are relevant for public health and for clinical practice. In working with clinics, we were able to confirm diabetes status of participants. Our study is the first of its kind examining multiple forms of psychosocial distress that have been reported qualitatively among Dominican adults with diabetes in previous studies. In collaboration with the clinical team, collected data were integrated into program design to help better address psychosocial distress in this population. The limitations of the study are that we collected data at one time point and cannot assess causality. We did not collect self-reported information on anti-depression or anti-anxiety medication use, which could have provided additional and distinct measures of distress.

Conclusion

To our knowledge, this is the first study of its kind to present the prevalence of multiple types of psychosocial distress factors in a Dominican context. Among adults with T2DM in rural communities in the Dominican Republic, the most prevalent types of psychosocial distress were depressive symptoms and acute stress. Although diabetes distress was mild across most participants, diabetes distress was the only type of psychosocial distress associated with A1c level. Patient distress can be influenced by one or several types of distress, suggesting the need for clinical teams and researchers to assess clinical and psychosocial measures in tandem. While diabetes distress, acute stress, anxiety, and depressive symptoms are correlated, they are still distinct forms of distress. Noting each form of distress can support tailored and holistic conversations to support diabetes management. Further attention in public health and clinical approaches is needed to account for differences between how men and women report severity of psychosocial distress to support intervention development.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank patient participants who shared their time with the study team. We would also like to thank the community health workers and nurses who facilitated our engagement with patients. We thank Dr. Elizabeth Walker for her feedback on the data collection instrument and process.

ORCID iD

Deshira D. Wallace

Ethical Approval and Consent to Participate

Ethical approval was given by the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Institutional Review Board (#23–0568). All participants gave full informed verbal consent to participate in the study.

Authors’ Contributions

DDW contributed to the study design, conceptualization, performed the analysis, and drafted the manuscript. KH contributed to data collection, data analysis, and writing the manuscript. QBN, TA, and RD contributed to data collection and critically reviewed the manuscript. LJE and APM provided access to the research site, feedback on recruitment of the clinics, and provided insightful feedback on the results as well as clinical significance. HD provided support for the study design and reviewed the manuscript. CB supported the conceptualization of the study and critically reviewed the manuscript. All authors read and approved of the final manuscript.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Data Availability Statement

The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available due to participant vulnerability but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

Abraham

Shah

N. G.

Diez Roux

Hill-Briggs

Seeman

Szklo

Schreiner

P. J.

Golden

S. H.

(2015). Trait anger but not anxiety predicts incident type 2 diabetes: The multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis (MESA). Psychoneuroendocrinology, 60, 105–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2015.06.007

Agudelo-Botero

Giraldo-Rodríguez

Dávila-Cervantes

C. A.

(2022). Type 2 diabetes and depressive symptoms in the adult population in Mexico: A syndemic approach based on National Health and Nutrition Survey. BMC Public Health, 22(1), 2049. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-14405-0

American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee. (2024). 2. Diagnosis and classification of diabetes: Standards of care in diabetes—2025. Diabetes Care, 48(Supplement_1), S27–S49. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc25-S002

Armora Langoni

E. G.

Wallace

D. D.

Barrington

(2025). Navigating double burden: Community health workers in rural Dominican Republic living and working through the epidemiologic transition. PLOS Global Health, 5(4), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0004378

Aschner

Gagliardino

J. J.

Ilkova

Lavalle

Ramachandran

Mbanya

J. C.

Shestakova

Bourhis

Chantelot

J.-M.

Chan

J. C. N.

(2021). High prevalence of depressive symptoms in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes in developing countries: Results from the international diabetes management practices study. Diabetes Care, 44(5), 1100–1107. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc20-2003

Baik

S. H.

Fox

R. S.

Mills

S. D.

Roesch

S. C.

Sadler

G. R.

Klonoff

E. A.

Malcarne

V. L.

(2019). Reliability and validity of the Perceived Stress Scale-10 in Hispanic Americans with English or Spanish language preference. Journal of Health Psychology, A24(5), 628–639. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105316684938

Bell

Dávila

A. L.

Clay

Markides

K. S.

Andel

Crowe

(2017). The association between cognitive decline and incident depressive symptoms in a sample of older Puerto Rican adults with diabetes. International Psychogeriatrics, 29(8), 1317–1325. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1041610217000746

Bickett

Tapp

(2016). Anxiety and diabetes: Innovative approaches to management in primary care. Experimental Biology and Medicine, 241(15), 1724–1731. https://doi.org/10.1177/1535370216657613

Björgvinsson

Kertz

S. J.

Bigda-Peyton

J. S.

McCoy

K. L.

Aderka

I. M.

(2013). Psychometric properties of the CES-D-10 in a psychiatric sample. Assessment, 20(4), 429–436. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191113481998

10.

Bruno

B. A.

Choi

Thorpe

K. E.

C. H.

(2019). Relationship among diabetes distress, decisional conflict, quality of life, and patient perception of chronic illness care in a cohort of patients with type 2 diabetes and other comorbidities. Diabetes Care, 42(7), 1170–1177. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc18-1256

11.

Cardenas

Mausbach

B. T.

Sommerfeld

Jimenez

von Känel

J. S.

Garcia

Aarons

G. A.

(2017). Depression is associated with increased risk for metabolic syndrome in Latinos with type 2 diabetes. The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 25(6), 646–653. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jagp.2017.02.017

12.

Castro

Ing

Park

Abrams

Ryan

(2018). Addressing noncommunicable disease in Dominican Republic: barriers to hypertension and diabetes care. Annals of Global Health, 84(4), 625–629. https://doi.org/10.29024/aogh.2370

13.

CDC. (2024). Diabetes and mental health. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Retrieved July 2023 from https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/living-with/mental-health.html.

14.

Cheng

Neugaard

Foulis

Conlin

P. R.

(2011). Hemoglobin A1c as a predictor of incident diabetes. Diabetes Care, 34(3), 610–615. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc10-0625

15.

Chima

C. C.

Swanson

Anikpezie

Salemi

J. L.

(2021). Alleviating diabetes distress and improving diabetes self-management through health coaching in a primary care setting. Bmj Case Reports, 14(4), e241759. https://doi.org/10.1136/bcr-2021-241759

16.

Chlebowy

D. O.

Batscha

Kubiak

Crawford

(2019). Relationships of depression, anxiety, and stress with adherence to self-management behaviors and diabetes measures in African American adults with type 2 diabetes. Journal of Racial & Ethnic Health Disparities, 6(1), 71–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40615-018-0500-3

17.

Colon

Giachello

McIver

Pacheco

Vela

(2013). Diabetes and depression in the Hispanic/Latino community. Clinical Diabetes, 31(1), 43–45. https://doi.org/10.2337/diaclin.31.1.43

18.

Disdier-Flores

O. M.

(2010). Association of major depression and diabetes in medically indigent Puerto Rican adults. Puerto Rico Health Sciences Journal, 29(1), 30–35. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20222331

19.

Duarte-Díaz

González-Pacheco

Rivero-Santana

Ramallo-Fariña

Perestelo-Pérez

Peñate

Carrion

Serrano-Aguilar

INDICA

Team

. (2022). Factors associated with patient empowerment in Spanish adults with type 2 diabetes: A cross-sectional analysis. Health Expectations, 25(6), 2762–2774. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.13501

20.

Dugani

S. B.

Mielke

M. M.

Vella

(2021). Burden and management of type 2 diabetes in rural United States. Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews, 37(5), e3410. https://doi.org/10.1002/dmrr.3410

21.

Dungan

K. M.

Braithwaite

S. S.

Preiser

J.-C.

(2009). Stress hyperglycaemia. The Lancet, 373(9677), 1798–1807. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60553-5

22.

Ehrmann

Laviola

Priesterroth

L. S.

Hermanns

Babion

Glatzer

(2024). Fear of hypoglycemia and diabetes distress: Expected reduction by glucose prediction. Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology, 18(5), 1027–1034. https://doi.org/10.1177/19322968241267886

23.

Emery

K. A.

Robins

Salyer

Thurby-Hay

Djira

(2022). Type 2 diabetes self-management variables and predictors. Clinical Nursing Research, 31(7), 1250–1262. https://doi.org/10.1177/10547738211067322

24.

Encyclopaedia Britannica. (1998). Cibao Valley. Retrieved May 8 from https://www.britannica.com/place/Cibao-Valley.

25.

Fisher

Hessler

D. M.

Polonsky

W. H.

Mullan

(2012). When is diabetes distress clinically meaningful?: Establishing cut points for the diabetes distress scale. Diabetes Care, 35(2), 259–264. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc11-1572

26.

Gallo

L. C.

Roesch

S. C.

Fortmann

A. L.

Carnethon

M. R.

Penedo

F. J.

Perreira

Birnbaum-Weitzman

Wassertheil-Smoller

Castañeda

S. F.

Talavera

G. A.

Sotres-Alvarez

Daviglus

M. L.

Schneiderman

Isasi

C. R.

(2014). Associations of chronic stress burden, perceived stress, and traumatic stress with cardiovascular disease prevalence and risk factors in the hispanic community health study/study of latinos sociocultural ancillary study. Psychosomatic Medicine, 76(6), 468–475. https://doi.org/10.1097/PSY.0000000000000069

27.

González

H. M.

Tarraf

González

K. A.

Fornage

Zeng

Gallo

L. C.

Talavera

G. A.

Daviglus

M. L.

Lipton

R. B.

Kaplan

Ramos

A. R.

Lamar

Cai

Decarli

Schneiderman

(2020). Diabetes, cognitive decline, and mild cognitive impairment among diverse Hispanics/Latinos: Study of Latinos - investigation of neurocognitive aging results (HCHS/SOL). Diabetes Care, 43(5), 1111–1117. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc19-1676

28.

Gonzalez Rodriguez

Wallace

D. D.

Barrington

(2018). Contextualizing experiences of diabetes-related stress in rural Dominican Republic. Qualitative Health Research, 29(6), 857–867. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732318807207

29.

Goyal

Singhal

Jialal

(2023). Type 2 diabetes. StatPearl Publishing. Retrieved July 23 from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK513253.

30.

Graham

Deschênes

S. S.

Rosella

L. C.

Schmitz

(2021). Measures of depression and incident type 2 diabetes in a community sample. Annals of Epidemiology, 55, 4–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annepidem.2020.11.010

31.

Henderson

K. M.

Clark

C. J.

Lewis

T. T.

Aggarwal

N. T.

Beck

Guo

Lunos

Brearley

Mendes de Leon

C. F.

Evans

D. A.

Everson-Rose

S. A.

(2013). Psychosocial distress and stroke risk in older adults. Stroke, 44(2), 367–372. https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.112.679159

32.

Hendrieckx

Halliday

J. A.

Beeney

L. J.

Speight

(2021). Diabetes Distress. In Diabetes and emotional health: a practical guide for health professionals supporting adults with type 1 and type 2 diabetes (3rd ed., pp. 31-51). American Diabetes Association. https://professional.diabetes.org/sites/default/files/media/ada_mental_health_workbook_r4.pdf.

33.

Hessler

D. M.

Fisher

Polonsky

W. H.

Masharani

Strycker

L. A.

Peters

A. L.

Blumer

Bowyer

(2017). Diabetes distress is linked with worsening diabetes management over time in adults with type 1 diabetes. Diabetic Medicine, 34(9), 1228–1234. https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.13381

34.

Ingram

P. B.

Clarke

Lichtenberg

J. W.

(2016). Confirmatory factor analysis of the perceived stress scale-4 in a community sample. Stress & Health, 32(2), 173–176. https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.2592

35.

Khan

M. A. B.

Hashim

M. J.

King

J. K.

Govender

R. D.

Mustafa

Al Kaabi

(2020). Epidemiology of type 2 diabetes - global burden of disease and forecasted trends. Journal of Epidemiology & Global Health, 10(1), 107–111. https://doi.org/10.2991/jegh.k.191028.001

36.

Kyrou

Tsigos

(2009). Stress hormones: Physiological stress and regulation of metabolism. Current Opinion in Pharmacology, 9(6), 787–793. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coph.2009.08.007

37.

Leyva

Zagarins

S. E.

Allen

N. A.

Welch

(2011). The relative impact of diabetes distress vs depression on glycemic control in hispanic patients following a diabetes self-management education intervention. Ethnicity & Disease, 21(3), 322–327. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21942165 .

38.

López

Coronado

J.-C.

Ripoll-Córdoba

Caldichoury

Quispe-Ayala

Morales-Asencio

Quincho-Apumayta

Castellanos

Martinez

Cardenas-Valverde

Castellanos-Alvarenga

L. M.

Salazar

Flores-Poma

Herrera-Pino

Bada

Florez

Alcos-Flores

Zurita-Cueva

Muñoz Romero

… Gargiulo

P. A.

(2025a). Factorial invariance of the generalized anxiety disorder scale (GAD-7) in Latin America and the Caribbean. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 16, 1529424. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1529424

39.

López

Morales-Asencio

Ripoll-Córdoba

Coronado-López

Caldichoury

Quispe-Ayala

Salazar

Florez

Flores-Poma

Castellanos

Herrera Pino

Quispe-Rodríguez

Cárdenas-Valverde

Alcos-Flores

Muñoz-Romero

Cantillo-Pacheco

Martínez-Sande

Camargo

Ocampo-Barba

… Gargiulo

P. A.

(2025b). Internal validity and reliability of the GAD-7 test in Latin America. Chronic Stress, 9, 24705470251315260. https://doi.org/10.1177/24705470251315260

40.

Mansyur

C. L.

Rustveld

L. O.

Nash

S. G.

Jibaja-Weiss

M. L.

(2016). Hispanic acculturation and gender differences in support and self-efficacy for managing diabetes. The Diabetes Educator, 42(3), 315–324. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145721716640905

41.

Mansyur

C. L.

Rustveld

L. O.

Nash

S. G.

Jibaja-Weiss

M. L.

(2021). Psychosocial contributors to depressive symptoms in hispanic patients with type 2 diabetes. The Science of Diabetes Self-Management and Care, 47(6), 415–424. https://doi.org/10.1177/26350106211054420

42.

Martinez

Lockhart

Davies

Lindsay

J. R.

Dempster

(2018). Diabetes distress, illness perceptions and glycaemic control in adults with type 2 diabetes. Psychology, Health & Medicine, 23(2), 171–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/13548506.2017.1339892

43.

Martinez-Vega

I. P.

Doubova

S. V.

Aguirre-Hernandez

Infante-Castañeda

(2016). Adaptation and validation of the Distress Scale for Mexican patients with type 2 diabetes and hypertension: A cross-sectional survey. BMJ Open, 6(3), e009723. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009723

44.

Matlock

K. A.

Pérez-Escamilla

Wagner

(2024). Depression and anxiety mediate the relationship between discrimination and well-being in a sample of latinx adults with type 2 diabetes: Results from a dual mediation analysis. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, 26(3), 453–460. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10903-024-01582-w

45.

Mayo Clinic. (2023). Type 2 diabetes. Mayo Clinic. Retrieved May 08 from https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/type-2-diabetes/symptoms-causes/syc-20351193.

46.

Mukherjee

Chaturvedi

S. K.

(2019). Depressive symptoms and disorders in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 32(5), 416–421. https://doi.org/10.1097/YCO.0000000000000528

47.

NIDDK. (2023). Managing Diabetes. The National Institutes of Health. Retrieved June 22 from https://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/diabetes/overview/managing-diabetes#team.

48.

Peña-Purcell

Han

Lee Smith

Peterson

Ory

M. G.

(2019). Impact of diabetes self-management education on psychological distress and health outcomes among African Americans and Hispanics/Latinos with diabetes. Diabetes Spectrum, 32(4), 368–377. https://doi.org/10.2337/ds18-0081

49.

Polonsky

W. H.

Fisher

Earles

Dudl

R. J.

Lees

Mullan

Jackson

R. A.

(2005). Assessing psychosocial distress in diabetes: Development of the diabetes distress scale. Diabetes Care, 28(3), 626–631. https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.28.3.626

50.

Ruisoto

López-Guerra

V. M.

Paladines

M. B.

Vaca

S. L.

Cacho

(2020). Psychometric properties of the three versions of the Perceived Stress Scale in Ecuador. Physiology & Behavior, 224, 113045. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2020.113045

51.

Sadeghzadeh

Wallace

D. D.

Gonzalez Rodriguez

Barrington

(2021). Coping with diabetes stress among adults in rural Dominican Republic: “I don't think about it”. Chronic Illness, 17(4), 391–403. https://doi.org/10.1177/1742395319882069

52.

Semenkovich

Brown

M. E.

Svrakic

D. M.

Lustman

P. J.

(2015). Depression in type 2 diabetes mellitus: Prevalence, impact, and treatment. Drugs, 75(6), 577–587. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40265-015-0347-4

53.

Sharma

V. K.

Singh

T. G.

(2020). Chronic stress and diabetes mellitus: Interwoven pathologies. Current Diabetes Reviews, 16(6), 546–556. https://doi.org/10.2174/1573399815666191111152248

54.

Smith

K. J.

Béland

Clyde

Gariépy

Pagé

Badawi

Rabasa-Lhoret

Schmitz

(2013). Association of diabetes with anxiety: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 74(2), 89–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2012.11.013

55.

Soto

García

Ortiz

Calderón

(2025). Diabetes attitudes, wishes and needs in the Dominican Republic (DR-DAWN2). The Science of Diabetes Self-Management and Care, 51(2), 168–179. https://doi.org/10.1177/26350106251315695

56.

Spitzer

R. L.

Kroenke

Williams

J. B.

Löwe

(2006). A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: The GAD-7. Archives of Internal Medicine, 166(10), 1092–1097. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092

57.

Vallejo

M. A.

Vallejo-Slocker

Fernández-Abascal

E. G.

Mañanes

(2018). Determining factors for stress perception assessed with the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-4) in Spanish and other European samples. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(37), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00037

58.

Verdecias

McQueen

Von Nordheim

D. A.

Broussard

D. J.

Smith

R. E.

Kreuter

M. W.

(2023). Diabetes distress in a medicaid sample: The role of psychosocial and health-related factors. Journal of Diabetes and its Complications, 37(7), 108495. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2023.108495

59.

Walker

E. A.

Dethlefs

H. J.

Dowd

R. A.

Schechter

Filipi

(2018). Improving diabetes outcomes in rural Dominican Republic. Diabetes, 67(Supplement_1), 1278-P. https://doi.org/10.2337/db18-1278-P

60.

Wallace

D. D.

Gonzalez Rodriguez

Walker

Dethlefs

Dowd

R. A.

Filipi

Barrington

(2019). Types and sources of social support among adults living with type 2 diabetes in rural communities in the Dominican Republic. Global Public Health, 14(1), 135–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/17441692.2018.1444782

61.

Wallace

D. D.

Núñez

Barrington

(2022). Revising the diabetes distress scale for use among adults in the Dominican Republic: Findings from cognitive interviews. The Science of Diabetes Self-Management and Care, 48(6), 459–468. https://doi.org/10.1177/26350106221128003

62.

Wallace

D. D.

Pereira

N. M.

Rodriguez

H. G.

Barrington

(2022). Provider perspectives on emotional health care for adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus in the Dominican Republic. PLOS Global Public Health, 2(11), e0000537. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0000537

63.

Wallace

D. D.

Then-Paulino

Jiménez Paulino

Tejada Castro

Castro

S. D.

Palar

Derose

K. P.

(2023). The co-management of HIV and chronic non-communicable diseases in the Dominican Republic: A qualitative study. PLoS One, 18(7), e0288583. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288583

64.

Wilczynska

Lubans

D. R.

Plotnikoff

R. C.

(2022). The effects of the eCoFit RCT on depression and anxiety symptoms among adults with or at risk of type 2 diabetes. Psychology, Health & Medicine, 27(7), 1421–1430. https://doi.org/10.1080/13548506.2021.1883684

65.

World Health Organization. (2023). Diabetes. The World Health Organization. Retrieved June 13 from https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/diabetes.

66.

World Health Organization. (2024). Dominican Republic: Health data overview for the Dominican Republic. The World Health Organization. Retrieved July 1 from https://data.who.int/countries/214.

Psychosocial Distress and Type 2 Diabetes among Adults in Rural Dominican Republic: A Descriptive Study

Abstract

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Keywords

Purpose

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

ORCID iD

Ethical Approval and Consent to Participate

Authors’ Contributions

Funding

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Data Availability Statement

References