Skip to main content
Journal of Research in Medical Sciences : The Official Journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences logoLink to Journal of Research in Medical Sciences : The Official Journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences
. 2013 Apr;18(4):346–359.

Can health promotion model constructs predict nutritional behavior among diabetic patients?

Siamak Mohebi 1, Ghlamreza Sharifirad 2, Avat Feizi 3, Saeedeh Botlani 4, Mohammad Hozori 1, Leila Azadbakht 5,
PMCID: PMC3793384  PMID: 24124436

Abstract

Since, the nutritional behavior is a complicated process in which various factors play the role, this study aimed at specifying the effective factors in nutritional behavior of diabetic patients based on Health Promotion Model. This paper reviews the published articles from 2000 to the beginning of 2012, using the various data banks and search engines such as PubMed, ProQuest, Scopus, Elsevier, and the key words" perceived benefits and barriers, perceived self-efficacy, social support, activity related affect, situational influences, commitment to plan of action, immediate competing demands and diabetes, self-caring and diabetes. Unfavorable self-care situation especially, inappropriate nutritional behavior is related to some effective modifiable factors. Perceived benefits and self-efficacy regarding behaviors play a major role in the nutritional behaviors. Social support especially, spouses’ support has a significant role in this regard. Moreover, there is a reverse relationship between perceived barriers and nutritional self-care. In addition, behavioral feelings, situational influences, commitment to plan of action and immediate competing demands and preferences can also impact and overshadow the nutritional self-care. Following the relationship between constructs of Health Promotion Model and nutritional behavior the constructs of this model can be utilized as the basis for educational intervention among diabetes.

Keywords: Diabetes, health promotion model, nutritional behavior

INTRODUCTION

Globalizations, changing in life-style and industrialization have important roles in the progression of chronic diseases such as cardiovascular diseases and diabetes.[1] Diabetes is a systemic metabolic disorder, which causes unhealthy metabolism of carbohydrates, lipids and proteins.[2,3,4,5]

Diabetes can have worse effects on the individual's life dimensions, and it does not have certain treatment.[6,7,8] Its complications can notably decrease life quality,[9] and may provide different personal and social problems.[10] Based on World Health Organization report, 4-5% of the health budget is for diabetes related diseases, in the way that diabetic medical cost is 2-5 times more than healthy individuals’ medical cost.[11] Therefore, this problem has been attracted medical systems attention.[12,13]

It is estimated that the number of diabetic individuals has been increased from 171 million in 2000 to 366 million in 2030.[14] About 100,000 individuals are added to diabetic patients every year. It is predicted that about 75% of the diabetic population will be in developing countries until 2025.[15,16]

More than 3 million diabetic individuals are living in Iran, and 20% of this population are afflicted by diabetes or are prone to diabetes.[17] Based on the statistics the prevalence of diabetes will increase to 3 times until 2021.[18,19,20]

It is in the way that dietary intake is rapidly changing in the middle east.[21,22] These changes include, tendency to saturated lipid, cholesterol, carbohydrates, different food with high energy, and attractive appearance, but low nutritional value, oily and sugary snack and decrease in fiber intake which increase the risk of contagious disease.[23]

Based on published researches, increased refined food intake and consuming more trans-fat sources as well as decreased amount of fiber intake may be associated with diabetes.[24,25,26,27] Dietary intake management should be carried out mostly by the diabetic patients which require extended changes in the life-style.

Thus, diabetes needs self-caring behaviors in the whole life. Self-caring improves life quality and is effective in the lowering of disease cost and hospitalized times. There are a lot of scientific evidences that follow these recommendations and are effective in diabetes treatment and also leads to less referring of patients to physician, medication need, hospitalization and diabetes complications.[28,29]

Although self-caring has beneficial effects for diabetes, creation, and preservation of the self-care process is difficult for diabetic individuals.[30,31] Therefore, large groups of diabetes do not take care of themselves.[32,33,34,35] Other researches results reveal that continuity of self-caring is in low-level in the diabetic patients (30-40).[36,37,38,39,40]

Most patients do not pay attention to their nutritional orders in the way that in Asian countries and other societies, less than half of the patients utilizes appropriate diet order as a part of their treatment.[41] Diet is a complicated behavior, which does not change easily. According to the reports most of the patients never follow dietary prescription.[42,43,44,45,46,47] Even in most studies, although patients have high nutritional information, their practice is not suitable.[48,49,50,51]

Nutritional behavior is not as the effect of nutritional awareness and information, and it has been influenced by different factors.[52] Some researchers, believe that increase of awareness does not preserve self-caring behaviors, and it is not also enough for long-time control.[53,54]

Since, there are some problems in the creation and preservation of self-caring behaviors and its complication, it is necessary to use behavior changing models and theories,[55] because they recognize the basic factors which impact on behaviors and determine their relationship. One of the models and theories, which are effective in nutritional diet and healthy nutritional behavior is Health Promotion Model. Therefore, this study aimed at specifying the effective factors in nutritional behavior of diabetic patients based on the Health Promotion Model.

METHOD

This study reviews the published articles from 2000 to the beginning of 2012, using the various data banks and search engines such as PubMed, ProQuest, Scopus, Elsevier in December 1st-29th 2012 by the corresponding author, and the key words” perceived benefits and barriers, perceived self-efficacy, social support, activity related affect, situational influences, commitment to plan of action, immediate competing demands, and diabetes, self-caring and diabetes [Figure 1].

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Pender's health promotion model

Perceived benefits and barriers

Self-caring in diabetes includes, personal, psychological, and social factors, which its cognition and perception help health services suppliers to plan and carry out desirable intervention to promote diabetic self-management behaviors. Perceived benefits and barriers have an important role in the self-care process among diabetes. Galsgow showed there is a significant, but reverse relationship between perceived barriers and self-caring behaviors. Psychological barriers are important factors in self-management behaviors.[56,57,58]

There is a meaningful relationship between perceived benefits, barriers, and severity of the disease and preventive behaviors of diabetes complications. Perceived barriers lead to follow less prescriptive orders of health and treatment care workers.[59] Wen et al., showed as perceived barriers among his research groups increase, prescribed physical activity and following nutritional diet decrease.[60] Koch, indicated a negative significant correlation between perceived barriers and self-caring behaviors.[61]

Perceived barriers are important factors in the self-care process.[62,63] Important barriers are non-awareness of healthy nutritional program, lack of support and perception of self-management.[63] Rothman et al. showed inappropriate diet and sport habit in these patients was related with perceived barriers.[64] It is seen in Krichbaum et al. study too. In his systematic review, he explains as perceived barriers rise; self-caring behaviors go down.[65] Whittemore emphasized that planners should pay attention to this factor in their educational interventions.[66]

Corina believes as perceived barriers increase, significant decrease happens in diabetic self-caring action.[67] The same results were seen in Adams et al. and Karter et al.'s studies.[68,69] Juan and Patti explain that perceived barriers have the strongest relationship with self-caring behaviors.[70,71] In spite of different studies, which exhibited reverse and significant relationship between self-caring behaviors and perceived barriers, one study did not receive this negative correlation.[72]

Perceived benefits are on the opposite side of perceived barriers which has an important role in diabetic patients self-caring. Pinto explained perceived benefits increase self-caring in diabetic patients.[73] Koch[61] and Patino et al.[74] also revealed there is a direct and meaningful correlation between patients’ perception of self-caring benefits and obedient of these behaviors. Toobert et al.[75] and Charron et al.[76] found the same results. Abood et al. points that as diabetic patients’ perception of self-caring behaviors benefits increases, this action goes up.[77] Wen et al.[60] explains net benefits (perceived benefits minus perceived barriers) have a direct relationship with self-caring behaviors. These studies found an important role for perceived benefits and barriers in the way that they showed a direct and significant relationship between perceived benefits with self-caring behaviors, but reverse and meaningful relationship with the perceived barriers. Perceived benefits refer to profitable perception of an action in order to decrease the disease risks we must point individuals tend to spend their time and resources in activities, which increase positive results of their experiences with more likelihood.[78]

On the other hand, perceived barriers refer to the beliefs about real costs. It includes perceived negative aspects, which are potential and acts as barriers for doing behavior. In relation with the health promotion behaviors, the barriers may be imaginary or real. They are of imagination related to in availability, inappropriate, costly, difficult or time-consuming of a special action. Barriers are considered as obstacles or personal costs of behavior.[78] In fact, barriers generally stimulate a motivation to prevent gaining behavior and when an action readiness is low, but barriers are high, the action is impossible to happen. When action readiness is high and barriers are low, probability of the action is higher.[79] Studied articles related to perceived benefits and barriers are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1.

Studied articles related to perceived benefits and barriers

graphic file with name JRMS-18-346-g002.jpg

Interpersonal effects (social support)

Since, the diabetes is a disease, which needs an extensive behavioral changes and dietary monitoring, interpersonal effects, and social support is an effective factor in the self-caring process.[80,81] The major part of caring in this disease is carried out in the house and in the family, which makes this disease to be called as a family disease.[82] Perceived social support in diabetic patients is not in an acceptable level.[83] Gillibrand and Cooper et al.'s studies clarified that diabetic patients require others’ support and social support is not set in an appropriate condition among these patients.[72,84] As the support increases, usually, dietary intakes improve.[60] Gillibrand and Stevenson[72] and Albright et al.[85] revealed, a positive and significant relationship between social support and self-caring behaviors. They declared that social and family background is strongly followed by self-caring behaviors especially in the dietary intake area.

One of introduced barriers about following nutritional recommendation is the lack of social and family support. According to the results of a study, those who received more family support, easily followed nutritional diet and were more successful in their program.[86] Galsgow also believes social support is the most powerful determining factor in patients adherence to the prescribed diet among diabetic patients.[87] Other researches show social support in these groups is effective in their tendency to self-caring activities.[88,89]

Family support has high effect on following nutritional recommendation and doing the prescribed sport in diabetics.[90,91] Moreover, emotional stresses and lack of family support are self-caring barriers among these patients.[62] Trief et al., in a 2 years research, came to this idea that married quality status (intimacy and adjustment) predicts faithfulness to self-caring aspects (dietary intake, sport and physician's recommendation).[80] Support and self-confidence is important predictors in metabolic control and following dietary intake among diabetic women.[92]

Factors such as intimacy among the family, existence or non-existence of conflict in the family and emotional situation in the family effect on patients’ self-efficacy.[93] Garay-Sevilla et al. also relates the faithfulness to dietary recommendation and medicine to social and family support.[94] Hiroshi pointed to social support and its resources on diabetes treatment and control.[95] Based on Gleeson-Kreig et al.'s study, the more patient receives supports from family, the more is faithful to follow the self-caring activities.[88] Therefore, in a study on 98 patients, Ilias concluded suitable hemoglobin level is related with the received social support of the family.[96] The same results are in other researches.[97,98] Of course in Chlebowy and Garvin study, there was not seen any significant correlation between social support and behavior.[99]

As a whole, researches have shown that there is a significant relationship between social support and health in the way that those who have more social support, are healthier. In his Health Promotion Model, Pender has posed family support as interpersonal effects, which can predict health promotion behaviors. Any way, it is seen, social support is correlated with the following self-caring behaviors. Since, support and family close relationship in Iranian culture have a special situation, it seems presenting enough information about diabetes to patients’ close relatives and their cooperation and involvement in the treatment process and also the disease control can make the team work easier and help them to get maximum life quality and health. Studied articles related to social support are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2.

Studied articles in interpersonal effects (social support)

graphic file with name JRMS-18-346-g003.jpg

Perceived self-efficacy

Today, we have evidences that one of the effective factor in self-caring of chronic patients especially, diabetes is self-efficacy. It is an important pre-requisite of behavior because it is as an independent part of individual basic skills. Of course, it must be pointed that the role of self-efficacy in starting and preserving healthy behaviors is shown in different researches.[100,101]

The studied researches findings point that self-efficacy is not in a desirable level in diabetic groups.[102] Bernal explains it is from medium to weak level.[102] Most of the researches indicated that self-efficacy impacts on self-caring behaviors.[102] Bernal studied the self-efficacy correlation in diabetes self-caring and concluded that it is related with self-caring of nutritional diet.[102]

Wen et al. who studied family support, nutritional diet and sport in American Mexican elderly diabetic individuals, observed that as self-efficacy raises, they better follow healthy nutritional diet.[60] In Aljasem's research who studied self-efficacy and barriers approach of self-caring behaviors in type 2 diabetes, found self-efficacy clarifies 4-10% of self-caring variance, and it is the most powerful predictor of these behaviors.[57] These were the same as Walker et al.'s results.[103] Stuifbergen et al. came to this point that increasing self-efficacy related to healthy behaviors can improve and promote these behaviors.[101] Krichbaum[65] and Norris et al.[104] also showed self-efficacy has a positive effect in diabetic healthy behaviors.

Bonds et al.[105] found a direct and significant relationship between self-efficacy and self-caring in his study on American diabetic patients. Walker et al.[103] and Woon[106] study explains the self-efficacy predictor role for nutritional behaviors based on the regression analysis results. Tan also revealed a direct and significant relationship between self-efficacy and preventive behaviors in type 2 diabetic patients in China.[59] The basic role of self-efficacy in weight control is also clarified in some studies.[107] Remond declares the same results;[108] However, contrary to the past researches, Gillibrand and Stevenson[72] and Chlebowy et al.'s[99] finding did not show any meaningful relationship between self-efficacy and glycemic control.

To Bandora, self-efficacy is the most powerful construct in predicting behavior change and generally those who show the most behavior change, have higher self-efficacy level to do special behaviors.[109] Self-efficacy effects on motivation and the stronger beliefs cause to repeat the behavior to come to his/her purpose; Thus, an individual with low self-efficacy is less doing healthy new behaviors or trying to change habitual behaviors. Based on the different researches about the effect of self-efficacy on function and behavior, this feeling has determining role in patients’ self-caring success especially in their nutritional behavior. Therefore, in self-caring behavior change process of diabetic patients, self-efficacy promotion is very important. Studied articles related to self-efficacy are summarized in Table 3.

Table 3.

Studied articles related to perceived the self-efficacy

graphic file with name JRMS-18-346-g004.jpg

Activity related effect

Chronic disease such as diabetes ruins family life and individuals’ view to future,[110,111] threatens personal independency and creates dissimilar feeling with others.[112] Diabetes complications effect on patients’ life aspects such as physical, psychological, social, economic, and family life. Researches have revealed that diabetes has a negative effect on general health, good feeling and life quality.[113]

It must be pointed if chronic disease is followed by depression prevalence, it is 3 times more in these groups and depression is about 61%.[114,115] Depression has a key role in controlling diabetes complications.[116,117,118] Depression is followed by the diabetic self-caring behaviors weakness and it may be one of risk factors for not doing self-caring behaviors.[119,120] In Lin's study, non-depressive diabetic patients can better control their blood sugar. Paul also showed that diabetic patients with low self-caring level have higher depressive level and lower general health. Gonzalez et al. explained that depression is related with not following self-caring aspects.[116]

Recent researches showed diabetic individuals talk about fear, phobia,[121] distress, grief and guilt feeling, and describe diabetic life as stressful experience.[122] In other study, the most important problem in diabetes self-caring was depression, stress, anxiety, fear, and worry in glycemic control.[123] Snock knew stress as one of the self-caring barriers in diabetic patients.[124] One of self-caring barriers in Guimaraes’ research was unfounded fears.[125]

Patients who do not have desirable self-caring level had more feeling of failure and disappointment. Because of this, they do not have the necessary motivation to take care of themselves and control the disease.[126] Some of problems in individuals of chronic disease are unpleasant mental imagination, fear of rejection, relationship problem with peers, fear of dependency and worry about self-efficacy.[127] Bulsara talks about better future hopefulness in challenging with the disease as an effective factor to being powerful in patients following prescribed diet.[128]

Ajoolat and Koorbin showed negative feeling in diabetic patients[129] because diabetes is followed with society negative view which labels the patients, threatens individuals’ identity and increase negative feeling exposure. Rubin et al. declares that self-caring instructional program can better control patients’ metabolic and good feeling and show meaningful increase of being good level and self-caring behaviors.[130] Littel suggested cognitive intervention can be used for patients who have not good feeling, self-confidence, and self-efficacy in order to control diabetes.[131] In America, vendern explained diabetic patients have higher self-caring, are more adjustable and have lower psychological problems.[132] Glasgow and Toobert also reported that patients’ satisfaction of treatment and being in good level is as effective level in following self-caring.[133] It must be noted that feeling status related to behavior has been recognized in recent researches as an indicator of health behaviors. Feeling associated with behavior creates a direct emotional reaction or internal level response to think about this behavior, whether it is positive or negative, whether it is ridiculous, enjoyable or unpleasant? Behaviors following with the positive feeling are rarely repeated whereas those following with the negative results are probably prevented. Sometimes some behaviors are probably followed with the negative and positive feeling. Therefore, it is necessary to study the relative balance between positive and negative feelings before, during and after the behavior. Studied articles related to activity related effect are summarized in Table 4.

Table 4.

Studied articles related to activity related action

graphic file with name JRMS-18-346-g005.jpg

Situational influence

An individuals’ recognition and perception of any situation or area can facilitate or inhibit behavior. Situational influences are in the health promotion behavior and consist of understanding available selections, request features and environmental aesthetic in which the behaviors conducted. The families must pay attention to this point that eating and preparing inappropriate food for diabetic individuals lead to an environment where they never follow their diet. This is the same as environmental effective factors which Pender declares as influenced factor impacts directly or indirectly on behavior in his Health Promotion Model. Eating food by the family which is not in these patients’ diet is considerable point in unsupportive family behaviors.

In a research, forgetfulness, inaccessibility to appropriate food in the restaurant and lack of an idea in cooking are basic obstacles to get the nutritional purposes.[134] Monge-Rojas believed social environment does not prepare the facilities to choose healthy food.[135] Various literatures have explained family and peers have an important role in nutritional behaviors of studied individuals.[91,136] In other researches, the family members’ taste is introduced as one of the important factor in unhealthy nutrition in the society which is more in women.[137,138] Peers’ support is one of environmental impact factor in following self-caring behaviors in Cooper's study.[84]

Different qualitative researches have assessed the unfulfillment of suitable self-caring in diabetic patients and introduced the personal and environmental barriers for suitable self-caring in diabetes.[56,139] Davison and Berch, through mental models introduction of illness basic factor, personal characteristics, family, peers, and environment in a broader scale have made necessary the socio cultural conditions of each society, the exact investigation of these factors before planning any kind of intervention.[140]

Anyway, individuals are attracted to the situations and the area where they are more feeling adjusted, related and are healthy and secure, and where they feel un adjustment, unrelated, unhealthy and threatening, they never have acceptable function. As a result, we can explain situational influences have direct or indirect effect in healthy behaviors, and it is an important key to extend more effective strategies to facilitate gaining and preserving health promotion behavior. Studied articles related to situational influence are summarized in Table 5.

Table 5.

Studied articles related to situational influences

graphic file with name JRMS-18-346-g006.jpg

Commitment to plan of action

World Health Organization has announced the rate of diabetic patients’ faithfulness to self-caring behaviors is 50% in developed countries and less than 50% in developing countries.[141] Other researches show that the diabetic patients’ commitment and faithfulness is in low level and treatment plan in acceptance is a major problem in these patients which is from 30% to 60%.[27,36] In a study conducted by Harris and Lustman 35-75% of patients never follow their diet, 30-70% control their sugar intake, 23-52% never take care of their feet, and 70-80% never have physical exercise.[142] Today we know that treatment and prevention of diabetic complications depend on the individual's desire and will power in self-management and self-caring behaviors.[143,144,145] For example, in a study in America, 40% of patients do not follow their dietary recommendation.[146] With many evidences due to the impact of treatment diet on diabetes, it is difficult to change diet and its preservation for the patients. In spite of enough awareness, lack of following the nutritional diet is repeated in some researches.[30,43] The investigations in different countries indicate the difficulty of following the nutritional diet and patients do not commit to follow the self-caring recommendation.[42]

Chapman's aimed to study the effect of psychosocial variables on related behaviors with diabetes self-controlling based on the health beliefs and planned behaviors and he explained the more is the barriers, the less is the commitment to follow healthy and recommended diets.[147] In Maizlish's study, the diabetic patients who do not follow recommended diets have not desirable blood sugar control. Story et al. consider the basic role of motivation in dietary commitment and lack of it, is an important factor to fail in life-style changes.[148]

Dietrich points to not enough understanding of the disease seriousness as decreased factor in self-caring behaviors.[149] Witimor in his research showed the rate of treatment diet commitment and faithfulness has been increased with the family support. He declared it predicts self-caring faithfulness. He also introduced patients’ satisfaction of treatment and caring as another behavior in self-caring commitment.[92] Trief et al. and Epple et al. believed social support is an important and effective factor in patients’ commitment to treatment, which facilitates adjustment and self-caring behaviors.[80,81] The inhibited role of exaggerated purposes and unrealities are the decreased effective factor in treatment diet commitment.[150,151]

The nature of long-time treatment diet in chronic disease causes tiredness and in commitment to diet therapy.[152] Therefore, the improvement of faithfulness and self-caring behaviors is the first step to disease caring and managing. Those who can manage themselves diabetes take it serious and have the commitment to self-caring behaviors.[153] They can make parallel diabetes self-management with the daily life.[154]

To increase the treatment faithfulness, the following points are suggested: Simple treatment diets organization, encouragement and rewards to follow the diet, families, and friends’ support.[155] Based on some researches, when caring is offered in patient-centered with empathy and concern and also their needs, values and preferences, patients’ cooperation and his/her independency in making the decision and commitment to treatment will increase.[156] Thus, commitment for a plan is an initiator of a behavior event. It leads to behavior and goes ahead during the behavior. Studied articles related to commitment to plan of action are summarized in Table 6.

Table 6.

Studied articles related to commitment to plan of action

graphic file with name JRMS-18-346-g007.jpg

Immediate competing demands and preferences

Individuals’ abilities are different to consider healthy behaviors and prevent them. Some people can be fluctuated in behavior or cut an activity. Immediate competing demands and preferences are some activities in behavior, which is appeared before aimed events and can overshadow the exposure of healthy behaviors.

To Brekke and Sunesson, considerable attention to some food leads to lack of self-caring in diabetes.[134] In Vijan et al.'s study; one of diabetic patients’ preferences is to prepare food with low-cost in spite of the conflict with the recommended diets.[86] Story and Stang pointed to taste and flavor as criteria to choose food.[157] In Robin's research, taste, and the flavor was a barrier to choose healthy food in diabetics.[66] In fact, food attraction, design, and decoration are effective on choosing any food in the way that colorful package and confections with low nutritional values may impact on the choice.[158] Food preferences are influenced by many factors, affecting on nutritional behaviors, which are clear in Pirouznia and Naska et al.[159,160] Lord and Richman have paid attention to patients’ preferences and competing demands as impact factors on self-caring behaviors, which lead to treatment diet faithfulness and noted to simplicity and complexity of treatment diet as preferences.[158,161]

Hosseyni et al.[162] and Kelishadi et al.[163] know the patients’ tendency to some foods and unhealthy diets such as fried food, which is consistent with individuals’ taste as impact factors on the lack of self-caring behaviors.

Richard believes that patients want to follow the diets with less complexity, more benefits, less complications and more plain.[161] On the other hand, individuals want to use those food prepared easily in a short time, which is not congruent with their recommended diet.[137,164] Even some researchers report labeling parties as the lack of self-caring behaviors.[123] Studied articles related to immediate competing demands and preferences are summarized in Table 7.

Table 7.

Studied articles related to immediate competing demands and preferences

graphic file with name JRMS-18-346-g008.jpg

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Regarding the association of self-caring and nutritional behaviors with some factors such as perceived self-efficacy, perceived benefits, and barriers, perceived social support, the commitment to plan of action and immediate competitors with healthy dietary patterns, it seems that Pender's Health Promotion Model is a good choice to predict self-caring behaviors in diabetic patients and also for instructional interventions.

This model describes a frame-work to explain healthy behaviors, which concentrate on individuals going to positive states and increasing healthfulness. Pender's model emphasizes on cognitive processes importance on controlling behaviors. In this model, the determinant concepts in health promotion behavior includes personal features and experiences, cognition, and emotion of the behavior. Health promotion behaviors are activities which are practical based on the individuals’ life-style. This model is practical for healthy behaviors in which threatening is not an important source of motivation for behavior. It describes how to decide on special behavior of health promotion and concentrates on individuals going to positive states and increasing healthfulness. Pender's Health Promotion Model is shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Process of study identification

In the revised studies of Health Promotion Model, 61% support the importance of perceived benefits to impact on healthy behavior. In Health Promotion Model, perceived benefits act as behavior direct motivational factor and behavior indirect motivational factor (that is made through commitment to behavior in which its benefits are predictable). Furthermore, among researches tested Health Promotion Model 79% has explained support as important barriers for Health Promotion Model determinants. Perceived barriers affect on health promotion behavior in a direct way through barriers to act and indirect way through commitment decreases faithfulness to plan.

As Bandora believes self-efficacy is an individual's judgment of some one's abilities to organize and fulfill a series of activities. Self-efficacy is not related to an individual's skills, but is associated to judgment about what everyone can do with these skills. Judging the individual's self-efficacy is different from anticipated results. Perceived self-efficacy is judgment about the individual's ability to do a special level of an action but anticipated results are the judgment about probable results (such as benefits and costs), which this action creates.

89% of researches in Health Promotion Model support the importance of self-efficacy as a determinant factor of health promotion behavior.

It seems, in this model, perceived self-efficacy is affected by activity related effects. The more positive is the affect, the higher will be the perception of self-efficacy. Therefore, it is mutual. It means that with the more perception of self-efficacy, the positive affect will increase. Self-efficacy impacts on functioning perceived barriers. Higher self-efficacy leads to lower perception of the target behavior fulfilling barriers. Self-efficacy stimulates health promotion behavior directly through efficient expectation and influences on perceived barriers and determining commitment level or insisting on planning behavior indirectly.

Furthermore, sensitive states are created before, in and after the action, based on the stimulation of characteristics with behavioral events. These emotional responses may be weak, moderate or severe, categorized or saved in mind from cognitive view and followed with later thought about behavior. It must be pointed that activity related affect is recognized in recent researches as health behavior determinants. Activity related affect creates a direct emotional reaction or internal level response about thinking of behavior whether the behavior is positive or negative and whether it is ridiculous, enjoyable or unpleasant?

Those behaviors following positive feeling are rarely repeated whereas those with negative results are inhibited. For some behaviors, both positive and negative feelings might be considered. Thus, a relative balance between positive and negative feelings before, during and after the behavior is very important to be studied. In fact, activity related affect is effective directly and indirectly through self-efficacy and commitment to planning.

Based on the model, interpersonal impressed factor (social support) is cognitions associated with others’ behaviors, beliefs, and attitude. They may correspond with reality. The important interpersonal resources in health promotion behavior are the family (spouse), peers, and health care workers. The interpersonal impressed factors are norms and standards (expecting important individuals), social support (financial or emotional encouragement), and modeling (learning replacement through others’ observation, which leads to special behavior).

In Health Promotion Model, interpersonal effective factors impact directly on health promotion behaviors and indirectly through social pressure or encouraging to commitment to plan of action. Anyway, desirable motivation to behavior in a consistent rout with interpersonal effective factors leads to increase the probability of those behaviors with high encouragement or reinforced socially. The importance of this construct as a determinant in Health Promotion Model is recognized. On the other hand, the individual’ understanding and recognizing any situation or domain can facilitate or prohibits the behavior.

Situational influence in health promotion behavior contains understanding available selections, request features and aesthetic aspect of an environment where the behavior is acted. Individuals are more attracted to the situations and environments where they feel adjustable, related, healthy, and secure and never have desirable functioning in the situations and environments where they feel unadjustable, unrelated, unhealthy, insecure, and threatening. It seems that in Health Promotion Model, situational influences have direct and indirect impact on healthy behaviors. Behaviors may be impressed directly by situations where appear in an environment full of targeted signals. 56% of studied researches report situational influences as an anticipator of health promotion. Situational influences may be an important key to extend more impressed and new strategies to facilitate acquisition and preservation of health promotion behaviors in different populations.

Commitment plan of action is an initiator of a behavioral event. It propels the individual to do behavior and goes them a head during it unless a demand or competitor is created in which s/he cannot prevent or resist. Human beings are generally act more organized and regular behaviors than disorganized ones. To Ajzen and Fishbin, purpose and commitment are the major determinants in voluntary behaviors.[79]

However, competitor's demands and preferences can remove the action fulfillment which the individual is committed. The competitor's demand is different from barriers because it must be inclusively acted another behavior in barriers based on unpredicted external demands. The competitor's preferences are different from the shortage of time because the 1st one prefers an action fulfillment on positive healthy action based on rating personal preferences. People are different in their abilities to keep the attention and prevent healthy behaviors stop. Some individuals have the ability developmentally or biologically to be fluctuated in functioning to others or to leave some activities. To prevent and inhibit competitor's preferences need self-regulation and control ability. High commitment to fulfill an action may preserve the individual of competitor's preferences and requests. In Health Promotion Model competitor's preferences and request directly effect on healthy behavior probability and decrease the commitment effect to act. Only one research has studied the competitor's requests as healthy behavior predictable. Although there are several diet therapy menos[165,166] and beneficial dietary patterns to control the complications of diabetes, discussed barriers may inhibit from following those diets.[167,168]

Considering the extensive studies, it is clarified this model is not used in nutritional instruction of diabetic patients. Therefore, this is considerable for instructional interventions because of past success such as physical activity and following reasons:

  • Nutritional behavior is a complicated one in which various factors are involved. Since, this model is an ecological approach to change the behavior and consider personal, interpersonal and social factors, it seems to be helpful in recognizing effective factors in the creation and preservation of the behavior

  • The basic part of diabetes control and treatment is upon self-caring and this model emphasize on self-regulation. Thus, this is effective in changing behavior

  • It is practical in the whole life and is not dependent on immediate threatening. Therefore, it seems to be useful in disease control in the life

  • Family support is an important factor in the creation and preservation of healthy nutritional behaviors. Thus, this model, which introduces family, friends, and health-care workers as important resources in commitment to healthy behaviors is effective in creating this behavior

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

This article is a part of Ph.D thesis in self-caring of metabolic patients nutritional behaviors; hence, we appreciate all the professors supporting this research.

Footnotes

Source of Support: This article is a part of Ph.D thesis in self-caring of metabolic patients nutritional behaviors; So, we appreciate all the professors supporting this research

Conflict of Interest: None declared.

REFERENCES

  • 1.Narayan KM, Gregg EW, Fagot-Campagna A, Engelgau MM, Vinicor F. Diabetes: A common, growing, serious, costly, and potentially preventable public health problem. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2000;50:S77–84. doi: 10.1016/s0168-8227(00)00183-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Christensen BL, Kockrow EO. Richman RL, United states of America: Mosbey Press Icn; 2004. Text Book of foundations and adult health nursing; p. 1784. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Issa BA, Baiyewu O. Quality of life of patients with diabetes mellitus in a Nigerian teaching hospital. Hong Kong J Psychiatry. 2001;16:27–33. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Wild S, Roglic G, Green A, Sicree R, King H. Global Prevalence of Diabetes: Estimates for the year 2000 and projections for 2030. Diabetes Care. 2004;27:1047–1053. doi: 10.2337/diacare.27.5.1047. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Smeltzer SC, Bare BG, Cheever KH, Hinkle JL. 11th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2006. Brunner and Suddarth's textbook of medical surgical nursing. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Shervin RS, Goldmann L, Bennett JC. Cecil text book of medicine. 21th ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders Company; 2000. Diabetes mellitus; pp. 1263–85. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Shaw JE, Sicree RA, Zimmet PZ. Global estimates of the prevalence of diabetes for 2010 and 2030. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2010;87:4–14. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2009.10.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Al-Moosa S, Allin S, Jemiai N, Al-Lawati J, Mossialos E. Diabetes and urbanization in the Omani population: An analysis of a national survey data. Popul Health Metr. 2006;4:5. doi: 10.1186/1478-7954-4-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Ghanbari A, Yekta ZP, Roushan ZA, Lakeh NM. Assessment of factors affecting quality of life in diabetic patients in Iran. Public Health Nurs. 2005;22:311–22. doi: 10.1111/j.0737-1209.2005.220406.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Bloomgarden ZT. American diabetes association annual meeting. Diabetes Care. 1997;21:457–80. doi: 10.2337/diacare.21.3.457. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Larijani B, Tabatabai A. Evaluation of economical coasts of diabetic mellitus. Iran south Med J. 2002;4:157–63. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.American Diabetes Association. Diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus. J Diabetes Care. 2005;30:50–5. [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Metzger BE. United States: John Wiley and Sons; 2007. American association guide to living with diabetes: Preventing and treating type 2 diabetes; p. 17. [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Wild S, Roglic G, Green A, Sicree R, King H. Global prevalence of diabetes: Estimates for the year 2000 and projections for 2030. Diabetes Care. 2004;27:1047–53. doi: 10.2337/diacare.27.5.1047. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Larijani B, Abulhasani F. Prevalence of Diabet in Iran. J Diabetes Lipid. 2005;4:75–8. [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Zimmet PZ. Diabetes epidemiology as a tool to trigger diabetes research and care. Diabetologia. 1999;42:499–518. doi: 10.1007/s001250051188. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Noori Tajer M, Heydari Sh. Tabriz: Tabriz Medical Sciences and Health Service University; 2006. Life style assessment in type 2 diabetic patients-clients of Oromieh diabetes clinics in 2005. Abstracts book of 9th Iranian Nutrition Congress. Tabriz; p. 77. [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Ministry of health. Diabetes mellitus. 1387. [Last accessed 2008 Jun 15]. Available from: http://www.mohme.gov.ir/health/index.htm .
  • 19.Deen D. Metabolic syndrome: Time for action. Am Fam Physician. 2004;69:2875–82. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Feldeisen SE, Tucker KL. Nutritional strategies in the prevention and treatment of metabolic syndrome. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2007;32:46–60. doi: 10.1139/h06-101. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Galal O. Nutrition-related health patterns in the Middle East. Asia Pac J Clin Nutr. 2003;12:337–43. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Ghassemi H, Harrison G, Mohammad K. An accelerated nutrition transition in Iran. Public Health Nutr. 2002;5:149–55. doi: 10.1079/PHN2001287. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Kris-Etherton P, Daniels SR, Eckel RH, Engler M, Howard BV, Krauss RM, et al. AHA scientific statement: Summary of the scientific conference on dietary fatty acids and cardiovascular Health. Conference summary from the nutrition committee of the American Heart Association. J Nutr. 2001;131:1322–6. doi: 10.1093/jn/131.4.1322. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Wahlqvist ML. Nutrition and diabetes. Aust Fam Physician. 1997;26:384–9. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Miraghajani MS, Esmaillzadeh A, Najafabadi MM, Mirlohi M, Azadbakht L. Soy milk consumption, inflammation, coagulation, and oxidative stress among type 2 diabetic patients with nephropathy. Diabetes Care. 2012;35:1981–5. doi: 10.2337/dc12-0250. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Esmaillzadeh A, Azadbakht L. Consumption of hydrogenated versus nonhydrogenated vegetable oils and risk of insulin resistance and the metabolic syndrome among Iranian adult women. Diabetes Care. 2008;31:223–6. doi: 10.2337/dc07-1256. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Azadbakht L, Haghighatdoost F, Esmaillzadeh A. Legumes: A component of a healthy diet. J Res Med Sci. 2011;16:121–2. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Brownell KD, Cohen LR. Adherence to dietary regimens. 1: An overview of research. Behav Med. 1995;20:149–54. doi: 10.1080/08964289.1995.9933731. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Hollenbeck CB, Coulston AM. Effects of dietary carbohydrate and fat intake on glucose and lipoprotein metabolism in individuals with diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care. 1991;14:774–85. doi: 10.2337/diacare.14.9.774. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Glasgow RE, Hampson SE, Strycker LA, Ruggiero L. Personal-model beliefs and social-environmental barriers related to diabetes self-management. Diabetes Care. 1997;20:556–61. doi: 10.2337/diacare.20.4.556. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Harris MI. Medical care for patients with diabetes. Epidemiologic aspects. Ann Intern Med. 1996;124:117–22. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-124-1_part_2-199601011-00007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Valk GD, Renders CM, Kriegsman DM, Newton KM, Twisk JW, van Eijk JT, et al. Quality of care for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in the Netherlands and the United States: A comparison of two quality improvement programs. Health Serv Res. 2004;39:709–25. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2004.00254.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Fenton JJ, Von Korff M, Lin EH, Ciechanowski P, Young BA. Quality of preventive care for diabetes: Effects of visit frequency and competing demands. Ann Fam Med. 2006;4:32–9. doi: 10.1370/afm.421. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Mainous AG, 3rd, Diaz VA, Koopman RJ, Everett CJ. Quality of care for Hispanic adults with diabetes. Fam Med. 2007;39:351–6. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Taggart J, Wan Q, Harris MF, Powell Davies G. Quality of diabetes care-a comparison of division diabetes registers. Aust Fam Physician. 2008;37:490–2. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Hertz RP, Unger AN, Lustik MB. Adherence with pharmacotherapy for type 2 diabetes: A retrospective cohort study of adults with employer-sponsored health insurance. Clin Ther. 2005;27:1064–73. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2005.07.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Janice Clarke RN. Evaluation of a comprehensive diabetes disease management program: progress in the struggle for sustained behavior change. Dis Manag. 2002;5:77–86. [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Aghamolai T, Sobhani AR. Behaviour and metabolic control in diabetes. J Hormozgan. 2004;7:111–5. [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Javadi A, Javadi M, Sarveghadi F. Knowledge, attitude and practice in diabetes. J Birjand Med Sci Univ. 2004;11:46–51. [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Waezi A, Ardakani M. Self management in diabetes refer to Yazd diabet research center. J Yazd Med Sci Univ. 2003;11:33–7. [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Chan YM, Molassiotis A. The relationship between diabetes knowledge and compliance among Chinese with non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus in Hong Kong. J Adv Nurs. 1999;30:431–8. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.1999.01098.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Eeley EA, Stratton IM, Hadden DR, Turner RC, Holman RR UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group. UKPDS 18: Estimated dietary intake in type 2 diabetic patients randomly allocated to diet, sulphonylurea or insulin therapy. Diabet Med. 1996;13:656–62. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1096-9136(199607)13:7<656::AID-DIA131>3.0.CO;2-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Campbell LV, Barth R, Gosper J. Unsatisfactory nutritional parameters in non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Med J Aust. 1989;151(146):149–50. doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.1989.tb139599.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Pirouznia M. The association between nutrition knowledge and eating behavior in male and female adolescents in the US. Int J Food Sci Nutr. 2001;52:127–32. doi: 10.1080/713671772. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Bashour HN. Survey of dietary habits of in-school adolescents in Damascus, Syrian Arab Republic. East Mediterr Health J. 2004;10:853–62. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Sakamaki R, Toyama K, Amamoto R, Liu CJ, Shinfuku N. Nutritional knowledge, food habits and health attitude of Chinese university students: A cross sectional study. Nutr J. 2005;4:4. doi: 10.1186/1475-2891-4-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Moghadasiyan S, Seyed Rasooli A, Zamanzadeh V, Nader Ali MB. Tabriz: Tabriz Medical Sciences and Health Service University; 2006. Assessment of diet therapy acceptance in diabetic patients. Abstracts Book of 9th Iranian Nutrition Congress, Tabriz; p. 156. [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Avazeh A, Jafari N, Rabie Siahkali S, Mazloomzadeh S. Knowledge level attitude and performance of women on diet and exercise and their relation with cardiovascular diseases risk factors. J Zanjan Univ Med Sci Health Serv. 2010;18:50–7. [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Ostarahimi1 A, Safaiyan AR, Modarresi J, Parvin Pourabdollahi P, Mahdavi R. Effect of nutrition education intervention on nutritional knowledge, attitude and practice (kap) among female employees of Tabriz university of medical sciences. Med J Tabriz Univ Med Sci. 2010;31:12–7. [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Mazloomy S, Mirzaei A, Afkhami Ardakani M, Baghiani Moghadam M, Fallahzadeh H. The role of health beliefs in preventive behaviors of individuals at high-risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus. J Shahid Sadoughi Univ Med Sci Health Serv. 2010;18:24–31. [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Jahanlo AR, Poor FA, Vafaie M, Kimiyagar M, Heidarnia AR, Sobhani AR. Structures measuring health belief model with HbA1c in diabetic patients with good control and poor. J Hormozgan Univ Med Sci. 2008;12:37–42. [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Tepper BJ, Choi YS, Nayga R., Jr Understanding food choice in adult men: influence of nutrition knowledge, food beliefs and dietary restraint. Food Qual Prefer. 1997;8:307–17. [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Task Force on Community Preventive Services. Recommendations for healthcare system and self-management education interventions to reduce morbidity and mortality from diabetes. Am J Prev Med. 2002;22:10–4. doi: 10.1016/s0749-3797(02)00422-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Acuña K, Muniz P, Formiga C, Bastos G, Camilo M, Hashimoto R, et al. A proposal for clinical nutrition education for health care university students and professionals in the Amazon. Nutr Hosp. 2004;19:353–61. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Yamaguchi Y, Miura S, Urata H, Himeshima Y, Yamatsu K, Otsuka N, et al. The effectiveness of a multicomponent program for nutrition and physical activity change in clinical setting: Short-term effects of PACE+Japan. Int J Sport Health Sci. 2003;1:229–37. [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Glasgow RE, Toobert DJ, Gillette CD. Psychosocial barriers to diabetes self-management and quality of life. Diabetes Spectr. 2001;14:33–41. [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Aljasem LI, Peyrot M, Wissow L, Rubin RR. The impact of barriers and self-efficacy on self-care behaviors in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Educ. 2001;27:393–404. doi: 10.1177/014572170102700309. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Daniel M, Messer LC. Perceptions of disease severity and barriers to self-care predict glycemic control in Aboriginal persons with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Chronic Dis Can. 2002;23:130–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Tan MY. The relationship of health beliefs and complication prevention behaviors of Chinese individuals with Type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2004;66:71–7. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2004.02.021. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Wen LK, Shepherd MD, Parchman ML. Family support, diet, and exercise among older Mexican Americans with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Educ. 2004;30:980–93. doi: 10.1177/014572170403000619. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Koch J. The role of exercise in the African-American woman with type 2 diabetes mellitus: Application of the health belief model. J Am Acad Nurse Pract. 2002;14:126–9. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-7599.2002.tb00103.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Rafique G, Shaikh F. Identifying needs and barriers to diabetes education in patients with diabetes. J Pak Med Assoc. 2006;56:347–52. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Nagelkerk J, Reick K, Meengs L. Perceived barriers and effective strategies to diabetes self-management. J Adv Nurs. 2006;54:151–8. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2006.03799.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Rothman RL, Mulvaney S, Elasy TA, VanderWoude A, Gebretsadik T, Shintani A, et al. Self-management behaviors, racial disparities, and glycemic control among adolescents with type 2 diabetes. Pediatrics. 2008;121:e912–9. doi: 10.1542/peds.2007-1484. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Krichbaum K, Aarestad V, Buethe M. Exploring the connection between self-efficacy and effective diabetes self-management. Diabetes Educ. 2003;29:653–62. doi: 10.1177/014572170302900411. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Whittemore R. Strategies to facilitate lifestyle change associated with diabetes mellitus. J Nurs Scholarsh. 2000;32:225–32. doi: 10.1111/j.1547-5069.2000.00225.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Corina G, Michael PR, James JD. Diabetes education program use and patient-perceived barriers to attendance. J Clin Res Methods. 2004;31:358–63. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Adams AS, Mah C, Soumerai SB, Zhang F, Barton MB, Ross-Degnan D. Barriers to self-monitoring of blood glucose among adults with diabetes in an HMO: A cross sectional study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2003;3:6. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-3-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Karter AJ, Ferrara A, Darbinian JA, Ackerson LM, Selby JV. Self-monitoring of blood glucose: Language and financial barriers in a managed care population with diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2000;23:477–83. doi: 10.2337/diacare.23.4.477. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Gagliardino JJ, Etchegoyen G PENDID-LA Research Group. A model educational program for people with type 2 diabetes: A cooperative Latin American implementation study (PEDNID-LA) Diabetes Care. 2001;24:1001–7. doi: 10.2337/diacare.24.6.1001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Rickheim PL, Weaver TW, Flader JL, Kendall DM. Assessment of group versus individual diabetes education: A randomized study. Diabetes Care. 2002;25:269–74. doi: 10.2337/diacare.25.2.269. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Gillibrand R, Stevenson J. The extended health belief model applied to the experience of diabetes in young people. Br J Health Psychol. 2006;11:155–69. doi: 10.1348/135910705X39485. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Pinto SL, Lively BT, Siganga W, Holiday-Goodman M, Kamm G. Using the Health Belief Model to test factors affecting patient retention in diabetes-related pharmaceutical care services. Res Social Adm Pharm. 2006;2:38–58. doi: 10.1016/j.sapharm.2005.11.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Patino AM, Sanchez J, Eidson M, Delamater AM. Health beliefs and regimen adherence in minority adolescents with type 1 diabetes. J Pediatr Psychol. 2005;30:503–12. doi: 10.1093/jpepsy/jsi075. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Toobert DJ, Hampson SE, Glasgow RE. The summary of diabetes self-care activities measure: Results from 7 studies and a revised scale. Diabetes Care. 2000;23:943–50. doi: 10.2337/diacare.23.7.943. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Charron-Prochownik D, Sereika SM, Becker D, Jacober S, Mansfield J, White NH, et al. Reproductive health beliefs and behaviors in teens with diabetes: Application of the Expanded Health Belief Model. Pediatr Diabetes. 2001;2:30–9. doi: 10.1046/j.1399-543x.2001.00000.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Abood DA, Black DR, Feral D. Nutrition education worksite intervention for university staff: Application of the health belief model. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2003;35:260–7. doi: 10.1016/s1499-4046(06)60057-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78.Glanz K, Rimer BK, Lewis FM. 3rd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2002. Health Behavior and Health Education: theory, Research, and Practice. [Google Scholar]
  • 79.Pender NJ, Murdaugh CL, Parsons MA. 4th ed. USA: Prentice Hall; 2002. Health-Promotion in Nursing Practice; p. 60. [Google Scholar]
  • 80.Trief PM, Ploutz-Snyder R, Britton KD, Weinstock RS. The relationship between marital quality and adherence to the diabetes care regimen. Ann Behav Med. 2004;27:148–54. doi: 10.1207/s15324796abm2703_2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81.Epple C, Wright AL, Joish VN, Bauer M. The role of active family nutritional support in Navajos’ type 2 diabetes metabolic control. Diabetes Care. 2003;26:2829–34. doi: 10.2337/diacare.26.10.2829. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82.Shaw BA, Gallant MP, Riley-Jacome M, Spokane LS. Assessing sources of support for diabetes self-care in urban and rural underserved communities. J Community Health. 2006;31:393–412. doi: 10.1007/s10900-006-9018-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83.La Greca AM, Bearman KJ. The diabetes social support questionnaire-family version: Evaluating adolescents› diabetes-specific support from family members. J Pediatr Psychol. 2002;27:665–76. doi: 10.1093/jpepsy/27.8.665. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 84.Cooper HC, Booth K, Gill G. Patients› perspectives on diabetes health care education. Health Educ Res. 2003;18:191–206. doi: 10.1093/her/18.2.191. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 85.Albright TL, Parchman M, Burge SK RRNeST Investigators. Predictors of self-care behavior in adults with type 2 diabetes: An RRNeST study. Fam Med. 2001;33:354–60. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 86.Vijan S, Stuart NS, Fitzgerald JT, Ronis DL, Hayward RA, Slater S, et al. Barriers to following dietary recommendations in Type 2 diabetes. Diabet Med. 2005;22:32–8. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2004.01342.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 87.Glasgow RE, Wagner EH, Kaplan RM, Vinicor F, Smith L, Norman J. If diabetes is a public health problem, why not treat it as one? A population-based approach to chronic illness. Ann Behav Med. 1999;21:159–70. doi: 10.1007/BF02908297. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 88.Gleeson-Kreig J, Bernal H, Woolley S. The role of social support in the self-management of diabetes mellitus among a Hispanic population. Public Health Nurs. 2002;19:215–22. doi: 10.1046/j.0737-1209.2002.19310.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 89.Morowatisharifabad MA, Mahmoodabad SS, Baghianimoghadam MH, Tonekaboni NR. Relationships between locus of control and adherence to diabetes regimen in a sample of Iranians. Int J Diabetes Dev Ctries. 2010;30:27–32. doi: 10.4103/0973-3930.60009. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 90.Marzilli G, Cossege W. The effects of social support on eating behavior in patients whit diabetes. [Last retrieved 2005 May 05]. Available: http://insulin-pumpers.org/textlib/psyc353. pdf .
  • 91.Klomegah RY. The influence of social support on the dietary regimen of people with diabetes. Sociation Today. 2006;4:104–8. [Google Scholar]
  • 92.Whittemore R, D’Eramo Melkus G, Grey M. Metabolic control, self-management and psychosocial adjustment in women with type 2 diabetes. J Clin Nurs. 2005;14:195–203. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2004.00937.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 93.Pinar R, Arslanoglu I, Isgüven P, Cizmeci F, Gunoz H. Self-efficacy and its interrelation with family environment and metabolic control in Turkish adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Pediatr Diabetes. 2003;4:168–73. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-543X.2003.00028.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 94.Garay-Sevilla ME, Nava LE, Malacara JM, Huerta R, Díaz de León J, Mena A, et al. Adherence to treatment and social support in patients with non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus. J Diabetes Complications. 1995;9:81–6. doi: 10.1016/1056-8727(94)00021-f. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 95.Hiroshi O, Kenji K, Narutsugu E, Hiroshi Y, Haruko K. Effect of social support on treatment in diabetes. J Osaka Med Coll. 2001;60:103–8. [Google Scholar]
  • 96.Ilias I, Hatzimichelakis E, Souvatzoglou A, Anagnostopoulou T, Tselebis A. Perception of family support is correlated with glycemic control in Greeks with diabetes mellitus. Psychol Rep. 2001;88:929–30. doi: 10.2466/pr0.2001.88.3.929. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 97.Schwartz AJ. Master of Gerontological Studies [Thesis] Oxford: Miami University; 2005. Perceived social support and self-management of diabetes among adults age 40 years and over. [Google Scholar]
  • 98.Ilias I, Tselebis A, Theotoka I, Hatzimichelakis E. Association of perceived family support through glycemic control in native Greek patients managing diabetes with diet alone. Ethn Dis. 2004;14:2. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 99.Chlebowy DO, Garvin BJ. Social support, self-efficacy, and outcome expectations: Impact on self-care behaviors and glycemic control in Caucasian and African American adults with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Educ. 2006;32:777–86. doi: 10.1177/0145721706291760. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 100.Shortridge-Baggett LM. Self-efficacy: Measurement and intervention in nursing. Sch Inq Nurs Pract. 2001;15:183–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 101.Stuifbergen AK, Seraphine A, Roberts G. An explanatory model of health promotion and quality of life in chronic disabling conditions. Nurs Res. 2000;49:122–9. doi: 10.1097/00006199-200005000-00002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 102.Bernal H, Woolley S, Schensul JJ, Dickinson JK. Correlates of self-efficacy in diabetes self-care among Hispanic adults with diabetes. Diabetes Educ. 2000;26:673–80. doi: 10.1177/014572170002600415. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 103.Walker SN, Pullen CH, Hertzog M, Boeckner L, Hageman PA. Determinants of older rural women's activity and eating. West J Nurs Res. 2006;28:449–68. doi: 10.1177/0193945906286613. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 104.Norris SL, Engelgau MM, Narayan KM. Effectiveness of self-management training in type 2 diabetes: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Diabetes Care. 2001;24:561–87. doi: 10.2337/diacare.24.3.561. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 105.Bonds DE, Camacho F, Bell RA, Duren-Winfield VT, Anderson RT, Goff DC. The association of patient trust and self-care among patients with diabetes mellitus. BMC Fam Pract. 2004;5:26. doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-5-26. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 106.Von Ah D, Ebert S, Ngamvitroj A, Park N, Kang DH. Predictors of health behaviours in college students. J Adv Nurs. 2004;48:463–74. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2004.03229.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 107.Bas M, Donmez S. Self-efficacy and restrained eating in relation to weight loss among overweight men and women in Turkey. Appetite. 2009;52:209–16. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2008.09.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 108.Redmond EH, Burnett SM, Johnson MA, Park S, Fischer JG, Johnson T. Improvement in A1C levels and diabetes self-management activities following a nutrition and diabetes education program in older adults. J Nutr Elder. 2006;26:83–102. doi: 10.1300/J052v26n01_05. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 109.Bandura A. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol Rev. 1977;84:191–215. doi: 10.1037//0033-295x.84.2.191. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 110.Telford K, Kralik D, Koch T. Acceptance and denial: Implications for people adapting to chronic illness: Literature review. J Adv Nurs. 2006;55:457–64. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2006.03942.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 111.Byrnes J. Melbourne, Australia: Deakin University; The effect of chronic illness on social connectedness and sense of control. Unpublished Thesis; p. 32006. [Google Scholar]
  • 112.Oki S, Hoshi T. Empowerment process of self-help group: A qualitative study of patient group members of crohn and colitis. Compr Urban Stud. 2004;83:29–45. [Google Scholar]
  • 113.Lustman PJ, Anderson RJ, Freedland KE, de Groot M, Carney RM, Clouse RE. Depression and poor glycemic control: A meta-analytic review of the literature. Diabetes Care. 2000;23:934–42. doi: 10.2337/diacare.23.7.934. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 114.Téllez-Zenteno JF, Cardiel MH. Risk factors associated with depression in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Arch Med Res. 2002;33:53–60. doi: 10.1016/s0188-4409(01)00349-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 115.Harris MD. Psychosocial aspects of diabetes with an emphasis on depression. Curr Diab Rep. 2003;3:49–55. doi: 10.1007/s11892-003-0053-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 116.Gonzalez JS, Safren SA, Cagliero E, Wexler DJ, Delahanty L, Wittenberg E, et al. Depression, self-care, and medication adherence in type 2 diabetes: Relationships across the full range of symptom severity. Diabetes Care. 2007;30:2222–7. doi: 10.2337/dc07-0158. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 117.Lin EH, Katon W, Von Korff M, Rutter C, Simon GE, Oliver M, et al. Relationship of depression and diabetes self-care, medication adherence, and preventive care. Diabetes Care. 2004;27:2154–60. doi: 10.2337/diacare.27.9.2154. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 118.Park H, Hong Y, Lee H, Ha E, Sung Y. Individuals with type 2 diabetes and depressive symptoms exhibited lower adherence with self-care. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004;57:978–84. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.01.015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 119.Trief PM, Morin PC, Izquierdo R, Teresi J, Eimicke JP, Goland R, et al. Depression and glycemic control in elderly ethnically diverse patients with diabetes: The IDEATel project. Diabetes Care. 2006;29:830–5. doi: 10.2337/diacare.29.04.06.dc05-1769. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 120.Lustman PJ, Clouse RE. Depression in diabetic patients: The relationship between mood and glycemic control. J Diabetes Complications. 2005;19:113–22. doi: 10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2004.01.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 121.Aujoulat I, Luminet O, Deccache A. The perspective of patients on their experience of powerlessness. Qual Health Res. 2007;17:772–85. doi: 10.1177/1049732307302665. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 122.Kralik D, Brown M, Koch T. Women›s experiences of ‹being diagnosed› with a long-term illness. J Adv Nurs. 2001;33:594–602. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.2001.01704.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 123.Russell G, Toobert DJ, Gillete CD. Psychosocial barriers to diabetes self management and quality of life. Diabetes Spectr. 2001;14:44. [Google Scholar]
  • 124.Snoek FJ. Breaking the barriers to optimal glycaemic control: What physicians need to know from patients’ perspectives. Int J Clin Pract Suppl. 2002;129:80–4. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 125.Guimarães C, Marra CA, Colley L, Gill S, Simpson SH, Meneilly GS, et al. A valuation of patients› willingness-to-pay for insulin delivery in diabetes. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;25:359–66. doi: 10.1017/S0266462309990055. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 126.Polonsky WH. Emotional and quality-of-life aspects of diabetes management. Curr Diab Rep. 2002;2:153–9. doi: 10.1007/s11892-002-0075-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 127.Abdel-Gawad ES. Quality of life in Saudis with diabetes. Saudi J Disabil. 2002;8:163–8. [Google Scholar]
  • 128.Bulsara C, Ward A, Joske D. Haematological cancer patients: Achieving a sense of empowerment by use of strategies to control illness. J Clin Nurs. 2004;13:251–8. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2702.2003.00886.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 129.Corbin JM, Strauss AL. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc Publication; 1988. Shaping a new health care system. [Google Scholar]
  • 130.Rubin RR, Peyrot M, Saudek CD. Effect of diabetes education on self-care, metabolic control, and emotional well-being. Diabetes Care. 1989;12:673–9. doi: 10.2337/diacare.12.10.673. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 131.Littlefield CH, Craven JL, Rodin GM, Daneman D, Murray MA, Rydall AC. Relationship of self-efficacy and binging to adherence to diabetes regimen among adolescents. Diabetes Care. 1992;15:90–4. doi: 10.2337/diacare.15.1.90. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 132.Van Der Ven NC, Weinger K, Yi J, Pouwer F, Adèr H, Van Der Ploeg HM, et al. The confidence in diabetes self-care scale: Psychometric properties of a new measure of diabetes-specific self-efficacy in Dutch and US patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2003;26:713–8. doi: 10.2337/diacare.26.3.713. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 133.Glasgow RE, Toobert DJ. Social environment and regimen adherence among type II diabetic patients. Diabetes Care. 1988;11:377–86. doi: 10.2337/diacare.11.5.377. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 134.Brekke HK, Sunesson A, Axelsen M, Lenner RA. Attitudes and barriers to dietary advice aimed at reducing risk of type 2 diabetes in first-degree relatives of patients with type 2 diabetes. J Hum Nutr Diet. 2004;17:513–21. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-277X.2004.00566.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 135.Monge-Rojas R, Nuñez HP, Garita C, Chen-Mok M. Psychosocial aspects of Costa Rican adolescents› eating and physical activity patterns. J Adolesc Health. 2002;31:212–9. doi: 10.1016/s1054-139x(02)00376-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 136.Pérez-Escamilla R, Hromi-Fiedler A, Vega-López S, Bermúdez-Millán A, Segura-Pérez S. Impact of peer nutrition education on dietary behaviors and health outcomes among Latinos: A systematic literature review. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2008;40:208–25. doi: 10.1016/j.jneb.2008.03.011. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 137.Reime B, Novak P, Born J, Hagel E, Wanek V. Eating habits, health status, and concern about health: A study among 1641 employees in the German metal industry. Prev Med. 2000;30:295–301. doi: 10.1006/pmed.2000.0647. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 138.Deshmukh-Taskar P, Nicklas TA, Yang SJ, Berenson GS. Does food group consumption vary by differences in socioeconomic, demographic, and lifestyle factors in young adults? The Bogalusa Heart Study. J Am Diet Assoc. 2007;107:223–34. doi: 10.1016/j.jada.2006.11.004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 139.Simmons D, Lillis S, Swan J, Haar J. Discordance in perceptions of barriers to diabetes care between patients and primary care and secondary care. Diabetes Care. 2007;30:490–5. doi: 10.2337/dc06-2338. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 140.Davison KK, Birch LL. Childhood overweight: A contextual model and recommendations for future research. Obes Rev. 2001;2:159–71. doi: 10.1046/j.1467-789x.2001.00036.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 141.Lubkin I, Larson P, editors. 6th ed. Burlington, Mass: Jones and Bartlett Publishers; 2006. Chronic illness, impact and intervention. [Google Scholar]
  • 142.Harris M, Lustman P. The psychology in diabetes care. Clin Diabetes. 1998;16:1–7. [Google Scholar]
  • 143.Fischer J, Kozewski W, Jones G, Staneu Kogstrand K. The use of interviewing to assess dietetic internship preceptors needs and perce-ptions. J Am Diet Assoc. 2006;106:A48. [Google Scholar]
  • 144.Fitzgerald JT, Gruppen LD, Anderson RM, Funnell MM, Jacober SJ, Grunberger G, et al. The influence of treatment modality and ethnicity on attitudes in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2000;23:313–8. doi: 10.2337/diacare.23.3.313. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 145.McCabe Bhrett A. Baton: Louisiana State University; 2003. Barriers to adherence in a free medication program for low-income individuals with type 2 diabetes. [Google Scholar]
  • 146.Toeller M, Klischan A, Heitkamp G, Schumacher W, Milne R, Buyken A, et al. Nutritional intake of 2868 IDDM patients from 30 centres in Europe. EURODIAB IDDM Complications Study Group. Diabetologia. 1996;39:929–39. doi: 10.1007/BF00403912. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 147.Chapman KM, Ham JO, Liesen P, Winter L. Applying behavioral models to dietary education of elderly diabetic patients. J Nutr Educ. 1995;27:75–9. [Google Scholar]
  • 148.Story MT, Neumark-Stzainer DR, Sherwood NE, Holt K, Sofka D, Trowbridge FL, et al. Management of child and adolescent obesity: Attitudes, barriers, skills, and training needs among health care professionals. Pediatrics. 2002;110:210–4. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 149.Dietrich UC. Factors influencing the attitudes held by women with type II diabetes: A qualitative study. Patient Educ Couns. 1996;29:13–23. doi: 10.1016/0738-3991(96)00930-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 150.Wadden TA, Womble LG, Sarwer DB, Berkowitz RI, Clark VL, Foster GD. Great expectations: «I›m losing 25% of my weight no matter what you say». J Consult Clin Psychol. 2003;71:1084–9. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.71.6.1084. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 151.Locke EA, Latham GP. Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation. A 35-year odyssey. Am Psychol. 2002;57:705–17. doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.57.9.705. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 152.Magkos F, Yannakoulia M, Chan JL, Mantzoros CS. Management of the metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes through lifestyle modification. Annu. Rev. Nutr. 2009;29:223–56. doi: 10.1146/annurev-nutr-080508-141200. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 153.Campbell R, Pound P, Pope C, Britten N, Pill R, Morgan M, et al. Evaluating meta-ethnography: A synthesis of qualitative research on lay experiences of diabetes and diabetes care. Soc Sci Med. 2003;56:671–84. doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(02)00064-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 154.Savoca MR, Miller CK, Quandt SA. Profiles of people with type 2 diabetes mellitus: The extremes of glycemic control. Soc Sci Med. 2004;58:2655–66. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2003.09.031. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 155.Rubin RR. Adherence to pharmacologic therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Am J Med. 2005;118(Suppl 5A):27S–34. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2005.04.012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 156.Ciechanowski P, Russo J, Katon W, Von Korff M, Ludman E, Lin E, et al. Influence of patient attachment style on self-care and outcomes in diabetes. Psychosom Med. 2004;66:720–8. doi: 10.1097/01.psy.0000138125.59122.23. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 157.Story M, Stang J. Understanding adolescent eating behaviors. Guidelines for Adolescent Nutrition Services. 2005. [Last accessed 2007 Dec 11]. Available from: http://www.epi.umn.edu/let/pubs/adol-book. shtm .
  • 158.Azadbakht L, Mirmiran P, Momenan AA, Azizi F. Knowledge, attitude and practice of guidance school and high school students in district-13 of Tehran about healthy diet. Iran J Endocrinol Metabol. 2004;5:409–16. [Google Scholar]
  • 159.Pirouznia M. The correlation between nutrition knowledge and eating behavior in an American school: The role of ethnicity. Nutr Health. 2000;14:89–107. doi: 10.1177/026010600001400202. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 160.Naska A, Fouskakis D, Oikonomou E, Almeida MD, Berg MA, Gedrich K, et al. Dietary patterns and their socio-demographic determinants in 10 European countries: Data from the DAFNE databank. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2006;60:181–90. doi: 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602284. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 161.Lerman I. Adherence to treatment: The key for avoiding long-term complications of diabetes. Arch Med Res. 2005;36:300–6. doi: 10.1016/j.arcmed.2004.12.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 162.Hosseyni Esfahani F, Jazayeri A, Mirmiran P, Mehrabi Y, Azizi F. Dietary patterns and their association with socio-demographic and lifestyle factors among Thehrani adults: Tehran lipid and glucose Study. J Sch Public Health Inst Public Health Res. 2008;6:23–36. [Google Scholar]
  • 163.Kelishadi R, Pour MH, Zadegan NS, Kahbazi M, Sadry G, Amani A, et al. Dietary fat intake and lipid profiles of Iranian adolescents: Isfahan Healthy Heart Program – Heart Health Promotion from Childhood. Prev Med. 2004;39:760–6. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2004.02.047. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 164.Girois SB, Kumanyika SK, Morabia A, Mauger E. A comparison of knowledge and attitudes about diet and health among 35- to 75-year-old adults in the United States and Geneva, Switzerland. Am J Public Health. 2001;91:418–24. doi: 10.2105/ajph.91.3.418. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 165.Azadbakht L, Surkan PJ, Esmaillzadeh A, Willett WC. The dietary approaches to stop hypertension eating plan affects C-reactive protein, coagulation abnormalities, and hepatic function tests among type 2 diabetic patients. J Nutr. 2011;141:1083–8. doi: 10.3945/jn.110.136739. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 166.Azadbakht L, Fard NR, Karimi M, Baghaei MH, Surkan PJ, Rahimi M, et al. Effects of the Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) eating plan on cardiovascular risks among type 2 diabetic patients: A randomized crossover clinical trial. Diabetes Care. 2011;34:55–7. doi: 10.2337/dc10-0676. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 167.Sharifirad G, Najimi A, Hassanzadeh A, Azadbakht L. Application of BASNEF educational model for nutritional education among elderly patients with type 2 diabetes: Improving the glycemic control. J Res Med Sci. 2011;16:1149–58. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 168.Sharifirad G, Najimi A, Hassanzadeh A, Azadbakht L. Does nutrition education improve the risk factors of cardiovascular diseases among elderly with type 2 diabetes? A randomized controlled trial based on an educational model. J Diabetes. 2012;28:10–9. doi: 10.1111/j.1753-0407.2012.00203.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Research in Medical Sciences : The Official Journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences are provided here courtesy of Wolters Kluwer -- Medknow Publications

RESOURCES