Blood glucose testing and primary prevention of Type 2 diabetes—evaluation of the effect of evidence‐based patient information: a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To compare the effect of our newly developed online evidence-based patient information vs. standard patient information about sub-threshold elevated blood glucose levels and primary prevention of diabetes on informed patient decision making. METHODS: We invited visitors to the cooperating health insurance company, Techniker Krankenkasse, and the German Diabetes Center websites to take part in a web-based randomized controlled trial. The population after randomization comprised 1120 individuals aged between 40 and 70 years without known diabetes, of whom 558 individuals were randomly assigned to the intervention group receiving evidence-based patient information, and 562 individuals were randomly assigned to the control group receiving standard information from the Internet. The primary endpoint was acquired knowledge of elevated blood glucose level issues and the secondary outcomes were attitude to metabolic testing, intention to undergo metabolic testing, decisional conflict and satisfaction with the information. RESULTS: Overall, knowledge of elevated glucose level issues and the intention to undergo metabolic testing were high in both groups. Participants who had received evidence-based patient information, however, had significantly higher knowledge scores. The secondary outcomes in the evidence-based patient information subgroup that completed the 2-week follow-up period yielded significantly lower intention to undergo metabolic testing, significantly more critical attitude towards metabolic testing and significantly higher decisional conflict than the control subgroup (n=466). Satisfaction with the information was not significantly different between both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence-based patient information significantly increased knowledge about elevated glucose levels, but also increased decisional conflict and critical attitude to screening and treatment options. The intention to undergo metabolic screening decreased. Future studies are warranted to assess uptake of metabolic testing and satisfaction with this decision in a broader population of patients with unknown diabetes.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.061 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".