Gender, Ethnocultural, and Psychosocial Barriers to Diabetes Self-Management in Italian Women and Men With Type 2 Diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although several ethnic groups experience a greater burden of diabetes, this has not been examined in first-generation Italians, who compose one of the largest ethnocultural groups in Canada. In this cross-sectional study, the authors examined the relationship among gender and ethnocultural factors, family support, depressive symptomatology, and illness perceptions on diabetes self-management (DSM) in 50 Italian women and men with type 2 diabetes. The authors first conducted a focus group to explore cultural barriers. They then assessed gender, ethnocultural, and psychosocial barriers quantitatively by an interviewer-administered questionnaire. Compared with Italian men, Italian women reported significantly greater depressive symptomatology and perceived disease seriousness. Greater depressive symptomatology was significantly associated with perceived family sabotage and DSM barriers. In univariate analyses, shorter duration of diabetes and greater perceived treatment effectiveness significantly predicted better DSM. In conclusion, certain illness perceptions and culturally relevant gender-specific barriers should be addressed by health care providers to maximize DSM in this population. Index Terms: diabetes, diet, gender, self-management
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".