MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078220401 · doi:10.1186/1471-2296-13-126

Effectiveness of a group diabetes education programme in underserved communities in South Africa: pragmatic cluster randomized control trial

2012· article· en· W2078220401 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Family Practice · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Education
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity of Toronto
FundersMedical Research CouncilUniversiteit StellenboschEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialCluster randomised controlled trialFamily medicineWaistDiabetes mellitusPhysical therapyHealth careHealth educationHealth promotionPublic healthGerontologyNursingObesitySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Diabetes is an important contributor to the burden of disease in South Africa and prevalence rates as high as 33% have been recorded in Cape Town. Previous studies show that quality of care and health outcomes are poor. The development of an effective education programme should impact on self-care, lifestyle change and adherence to medication; and lead to better control of diabetes, fewer complications and better quality of life. TRIAL DESIGN: Pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trialParticipants: Type 2 diabetic patients attending 45 public sector community health centres in Cape TownInterventions: The intervention group will receive 4 sessions of group diabetes education delivered by a health promotion officer in a guiding style. The control group will receive usual care which consists of ad hoc advice during consultations and occasional educational talks in the waiting room. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of the group diabetes education programmeOutcomes: PRIMARY OUTCOMES: diabetes self-care activities, 5% weight loss, 1% reduction in HbA1c. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: self-efficacy, locus of control, mean blood pressure, mean weight loss, mean waist circumference, mean HbA1c, mean total cholesterol, quality of lifeRandomisation: Computer generated random numbersBlinding: Patients, health promoters and research assistants could not be blinded to the health centre's allocationNumbers randomized: Seventeen health centres (34 in total) will be randomly assigned to either control or intervention groups. A sample size of 1360 patients in 34 clusters of 40 patients will give a power of 80% to detect the primary outcomes with 5% precision. Altogether 720 patients were recruited in the intervention arm and 850 in the control arm giving a total of 1570. DISCUSSION: The study will inform policy makers and managers of the district health system, particularly in low to middle income countries, if this programme can be implemented more widely. TRIAL REGISTER: Pan African Clinical Trial Registry PACTR201205000380384.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.118
Threshold uncertainty score0.701

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it