Evidence Hub

Knowledge, perceptions and attitudes toward diabetes care in oncology: a pilot survey across specialties (DiaLog Study)

Tekustun GN, Yesil-Gurel BH, Kitapli S, Alkan A, Tanriverdi O

Endocrine, 2026

50 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Managing diabetes in patients with cancer requires balancing oncologic priorities with safe glycemic targets. Evidence describing how trainees from different specialties approach this interface is limited. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional pilot survey among 111 physicians (Internal Medicine n = 50; Endocrinology n = 19; Medical Oncology n = 42). The questionnaire comprised four knowledge (T/F), eight perception, and four attitude items. Scores were computed as total knowledge (0–4), perception (0–32), and a composite attitude score (6–14) formed by summing the treatment attitude subscale (0–12) and the steroid attitude item (0–4) after harmonizing item directions. Non-parametric tests compared groups; associations used Spearman’s rho and ordinal/linear regression. Reliability was assessed with Cronbach’s alpha. RESULTS: Median knowledge, perception, and composite attitude scores were 2, 18, and 11, respectively; no overall differences were observed across specialties. Perception items differed for the cardiovascular impact of poor glycemic control in patients with short life expectancy (p = 0.037), the safety of short-term steroids in advanced disease (p = 0.0017), and the potential harm of steroids with immunotherapy (p = 0.048). Avoidance of steroids in patients with uncontrolled glycemia differed by specialty (p = 0.0014). Correlations showed knowledge modestly associated with perception (ρ = 0.348) and attitude (ρ = 0.212), while perception more…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cross-sectional, done in people. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause. Reported size: 50 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free