Last updated August 16, 2026
Key finding
GAD-7 scores decreased from 10.18 ± 5.31 to 5.75 ± 2.89 (p = 0.0060)
The STEADY study evaluated the feasibility and effectiveness of a behavioral intervention for individuals with Type 1 diabetes and eating disorders, showing significant improvements in anxiety and diabetes-related distress.
Quick read
The essential study design details in one scan.
EvidenceScore™
Moderate
Study type
RCTs
Follow-up
Medium-Term (3–12 mo)
Risk of bias
Some Concerns
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Plain-language summary
A plain-language read of the study’s main message and where it applies.
Study focus
The STEADY study evaluated the feasibility and effectiveness of a behavioral intervention for individuals with Type 1 diabetes and eating disorders, showing significant improvements in anxiety and diabetes-related distress.
This study highlights the importance of addressing mental health in individuals with Type 1 diabetes and eating disorders. Effective management of anxiety and diabetes distress can lead to better overall health outcomes, making it crucial for healthcare providers to consider integrated behavioral interventions.
The study's sample size may limit generalizability. The intervention's long-term effects were not assessed. Potential biases in self-reported measures could affect outcomes.
Published in
Publication details and source links for this paper.
Marietta S, Natalie Z, Amy H, et al. Safe management of people with Type 1 diabetes and EAting Disorders studY (STEADY). The Lancet Regional Health - Europe. 2025;50:101205. doi:10.1016/j.lanepe.2024.101205
GAD-7 scores decreased significantly from 10.18 ± 5.31 to 5.75 ± 2.89 (p = 0.006).
DIDP scores increased from 2.46 ± 0.87 to 3.13 ± 0.63 (p = 0.020).
Significant improvements were observed in DEPS-R and EDE-QS scores from baseline.
Evidence network
Understand where this research contributes within the broader evidence network.
This study contributes evidence to STEADY intervention, Usual care and Depression severity measured by PHQ-9, Diabetes Distress Scale score, Diabetes Eating Problems Survey-Revised (DEPS-R) score improvement, and 5 more.
This study contributes evidence to
Primary intervention
STEADY intervention
Primary outcomes
Evidence topics
Primary intervention
Intervention and outcome relationships this study adds to the evidence network.
Editorial context
See why this paper is useful beyond its individual results.
Evidence network role
This section describes how the study fits into the current evidence network. It does not determine whether an intervention works on its own.
1
Related topics
9
Evidence pairs
352
Related studies
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Save studies and evidence pages, organize your personal Evidence Tracker, and keep the research you care about in one place.
Primary evidence
Evidence topic
matched_outcome
Core evidence
The primary outcomes reported in this study.
STEADY intervention → Depression severity measured by PHQ-9
STEADY intervention → Depression severity measured by PHQ-9
STEADY intervention → Diabetes Distress Scale score
STEADY intervention → Diabetes Distress Scale score
STEADY intervention → Diabetes Eating Problems Survey-Revised (DEPS-R) score improvement
STEADY intervention → Diabetes Eating Problems Survey-Revised (DEPS-R) score improvement
STEADY intervention → Eating Disorder Psychopathology Measured by EDE-Q Scale
STEADY intervention → Eating Disorder Psychopathology Measured by EDE-Q Scale
STEADY intervention → Feasibility of STEADY intervention based on participant recruitment and retention rates
STEADY intervention → Feasibility of STEADY intervention based on participant recruitment and retention rates
STEADY intervention → Generalised Anxiety Disorder Assessment (GAD-7) Score
STEADY intervention → Generalised Anxiety Disorder Assessment (GAD-7) Score
STEADY intervention → Impact of Diabetes Profile (DIDP) scores
STEADY intervention → Impact of Diabetes Profile (DIDP) scores
Usual care → Generalised Anxiety Disorder Assessment (GAD-7) Score
Usual care → Generalised Anxiety Disorder Assessment (GAD-7) Score
Evidence Library
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Evidence Library
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Explore related studies, evidence collections, and research questions.
Relationships organized using the Dediabetes Evidence Intelligence™ framework.
This study contributes to evidence on STEADY intervention and Depression severity measured by PHQ-9, STEADY intervention and Diabetes Distress Scale score.
This study contributes to the evidence on the following intervention-outcome relationships.
Behavioral & Lifestyle
Behavioral & Lifestyle
Curated evidence collections and hubs this study is part of.
All studies measuring Depression severity measured by PHQ-9
Measures Depression severity measured by PHQ-9 as a key outcome.
All studies measuring Diabetes Distress Scale score
Measures Diabetes Distress Scale score as a key outcome.
All studies on STEADY intervention
Contributes to STEADY intervention evidence base.
Latest published studies
Published within the last 2 years.
Jump to pre-filtered views in Evidence Explorer.
1 results
1 results
1 results
1 results
1 results
Generated from the study's connected evidence using Evidence Intelligence™.
STEADY intervention appears to improve Depression severity measured by PHQ-9.
ConsistencyScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.
Ranked evidence signals
Depression severity measured by PHQ-9
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 59.0 | strong positive | ConsistencyScore™ Unclear | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.
Limitations
STEADY intervention appears to improve Diabetes Distress Scale score.
ConsistencyScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.
Ranked evidence signals
Diabetes Distress Scale score
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 59.0 | strong positive | ConsistencyScore™ Unclear | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.
Limitations
STEADY intervention appears to improve Diabetes Eating Problems Survey-Revised (DEPS-R) score improvement.
ConsistencyScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.
Ranked evidence signals
Diabetes Eating Problems Survey-Revised (DEPS-R) score improvement
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 59.0 | strong positive | ConsistencyScore™ Unclear | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.
Limitations
STEADY intervention appears to improve Eating Disorder Psychopathology Measured by EDE-Q Scale.
ConsistencyScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.
Ranked evidence signals
Eating Disorder Psychopathology Measured by EDE-Q Scale
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 59.0 | strong positive | ConsistencyScore™ Unclear | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.
Limitations
Next steps
Choose a next path through related evidence topics, Evidence Explorer views, and research summaries.
Open broader Evidence Explorer views for this relationship.
Read related research summaries.
Focused on evidence, not advertising.
Your data is always protected.
New studies added every day.
