Assessment of two culturally competent Diabetes education methods: Individual versus Individual plus Group education in Canadian Portuguese adults with Type 2 Diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of two culturally competent diabetes education methods, individual counselling and individual counselling in conjunction with group education, on nutrition adherence and glycemic control in Portuguese Canadian adults with type 2 diabetes over a three-month period. DESIGN: The Diabetes Education Centre is located in the urban multicultural city of Toronto, Ontario, Canada. We used a three-month randomized controlled trial design. Eligible Portuguese-speaking adults with type 2 diabetes were randomly assigned to receive either diabetes education counselling only (control group) or counselling in conjunction with group education (intervention group). Of the 61 patients who completed the study, 36 were in the counselling only and 25 in the counselling with group education intervention. We used a per-protocol analysis to examine the efficacy of the two educational approaches on nutrition adherence and glycemic control; paired t-tests to compare results within groups and analysis of covariance (ACOVA) to compare outcomes between groups adjusting for baseline measures. The Theory of Planned Behaviour was used to describe the behavioural mechanisms that influenced nutrition adherence. RESULTS: Attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behaviour control, and intentions towards nutrition adherence, self-reported nutrition adherence and glycemic control significantly improved in both groups, over the three-month study period. Yet, those receiving individual counselling with group education showed greater improvement in all measures with the exception of glycemic control, where no significant difference was found between the two groups at three months. CONCLUSIONS: Our study findings provide preliminary evidence that culturally competent group education in conjunction with individual counselling may be more efficacious in shaping eating behaviours than individual counselling alone for Canadian Portuguese adults with type 2 diabetes. However, larger longitudinal studies are needed to determine the most efficacious education method to sustain long-term nutrition adherence and glycemic control.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".