Shows social support affects executive functioning in adolescents with type 1 diabetes, suggesting interventions should address social contexts.
Introduction and Objective: Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is complex, and few teens meet glycemic targets. Social capital (i.e., benefits derived from social networks) and executive functioning (EF; e.g., working memory, inhibition, organization) independently facilitate optimal self-management and HbA1c. It is unclear if the two constructs confer compounded risk for self-management. Methods: Teens with T1D were enrolled (n=70; 13-17 years, M=15.7; Female=41%; White=71%, Black=21%, Hispanic/Latine=1.4%; HbA1c M=8.7%). Measures: Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function, My Social Support System (study-adapted social capital), Collective Efficacy Scale (informal social control, social cohesion/trust), and Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support. Descriptive statistics and age-adjusted regression were used. Results: Mean EF scores were normative: behavior regulation (T=54.2); emotion regulation (T=57.1); cognitive regulation (T=54.9); and global EF (T=55.6). Adolescents described several social capital sources (e.g., family, peers, teachers) from whom they receive and give support. Participants had moderate to high collective efficacy. Lower total and family support were associated with greater behavioral (btotal=-3.96, p=0.03; bfamily=-5.46, p=0.001) and emotion dysregulation (btotal=-5.16, p=0.004; bfamily=-7.97, p<0.001), and global EF deficits (btotal=-4.11, p=0.03; bfamily=-7.32, p<0.001). Lower family support was associated with cognitive dyregulation (b=-6.68, p<0.001). Lower social cohesion was associated with emotion dysregulation (b=-7.24, p=0.005) and global EF (b=-5.71, p=0.03) difficulties. Less social capital given and received were associated with emotion dysregulation (bgiven=-1.89, p=0.007; breceived=-2.22, p=0.001). Conclusion: Less access to socially enriching environments and greater social stressors could lead to greater EF difficulties and compound risk. Targeting both in future T1D behavioral interventions with adolescents may be warranted to improve glycemic health. Disclosure D. Williford: None. J. Reiter-Purtill: None. A. Gutierrez-Colina: None. N. Yayah Jones: Consultant; Current; Medtronic, Sanofi. S. Corathers: None. L. Crosby: Advisory Panel; Current; Pfizer Inc. A. Modi: None. Funding National Institutes of Health (T32HD068223)
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
WILLIFORD et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: