A randomized trial of regular standardized telephone contact by a diabetes nurse educator in adolescents with poor diabetes control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the effect of regular standardized telephone contact by a diabetes nurse educator (DNE) on metabolic control, treatment compliance, and quality of life in adolescents with poorly controlled type 1 diabetes. METHODS: A single-blinded 6-month randomized controlled trial was used. Participants included 46 of 49 eligible adolescents (13-17 yr) with type 1 diabetes >1-yr duration and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) >8.5% for the previous 6 months. Subjects were randomly assigned to 6 months of standard diabetes management or standard care plus weekly telephone contact by a DNE. Telephone conversations included review of events in the adolescents' lives and diabetes education, but the primary focus was on blood glucose results and insulin-dose adjustments. HbA1c, compliance with glucose monitoring, quality of life [Diabetes Quality of Life Scale for Youth (DQOLY)], and family functioning [Family Environment Scale (FES)] were assessed at baseline, and at 3 and 6 months. Posthoc, HbA1c levels were assessed 6 months following study completion. RESULTS: Six months of regular telephone contact by a DNE had no immediate effect on any of the outcome measures. However, posthoc 6 months, HbA1c levels decreased (1% change compared to baseline) in 6/21 of the study group and 0/18 of the control group, while HbA1c increased in 4/21 of study subjects compared to 8/18 of control subjects (p = 0.015). CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to adult studies, regular telephone contact did not lead to immediate improvements in metabolic control in adolescents with poorly controlled type 1 diabetes. However, knowledge and skills gained during the intervention may have had a delayed beneficial effect in these high-risk adolescents.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".