Depression in Patients with Type II Diabetes: Case study at Diabetic Outpatient Clinic, in Samut Prakan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This descriptive research studied the depression level of patients with diabetes type II at diabetic clinics in Samut Prakarn, and, identified the causes of severe depression in patients with type 2. There were 209 participants enrolled in the study. The samples were selected by opportunistic sampling technique. The data were collected from May 2013 to July 2013, using the CES-D questionnaire, with Cronbach's coefficient alpha 0.82 and guidelines for interviews. Data were analyzed by descriptive statistics. RESEARCH RESULTS: 1. 66 percent of participants had a depression score at a low level. 2. The CES-D showed that, 44 percent were unhappy and 38 percent did not feel that their life was enjoyable. 29 percent felt no hope for the future, 5.6 percent were easily upset and 8.3 percent suffered from insomnia and severe depression. 3. Half of the participants mentioned that troubled family relationships was a main cause of their depression, 42.9 percents felt worrying about their illness, 35.3 percent blamed over work and almost 15 percent identified loss of love as the cause of depression.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".