Acceptance, Cognitions, and Resourcefulness in Women with Diabetes
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The coexistence of diabetes and depression occurs frequently among young and middle-age women. Unless one is resourceful, simultaneous management of the symptoms of both conditions is especially challenging. Skills constituting resourcefulness are learned throughout life and are important for the optimal performance of daily activities. Little is known about specific factors that influence resourcefulness. In this study contextual factors (diabetic and depressive symptoms) and cognitive factors (positive cognitions and acceptance of diabetes) were examined as antecedents of learned resourcefulness in 82 women with type 2 diabetes. Regression analyses showed that depressive symptoms and positive cognitions were significant antecedents of learned resourcefulness: Positive cognitions mediated the effects of depressive symptoms on learned resourcefulness. The findings suggest the need for interventions thatfocus on development of positive cognitions to better promote resourcefulness in women with type 2 diabetes who are at risk for 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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 it