MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103893047 · doi:10.5430/jnep.v4n5p42

Health promoting lifestyle behaviors and related risk factors among female employees in Zagazig city

2014· article· en· W2103893047 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Amany Sobhy Sorour, Wageda Wafik Kamel, Eman Mohammed Abd El- Aziz, Amany Aboelseoud

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Education and Practice · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth and Wellbeing Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineObesityInclusion and exclusion criteriaInclusion (mineral)Diabetes mellitusGerontologyEnvironmental healthFamily medicinePsychologyAlternative medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE AR-SA MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 Aim of the study: This study aimed to measure health Promoting lifestyle behaviors and related risk factors among female employees in Zagazig City. Subjects and Methods: A cross sectional research design was selected to achieve the aim of the current study. The study was carried out on females employed in the governorate building in Zagazig city. Study participants: The study sample is a convenience sample of 200 females recruited from Zagazig Governorate administrative building. The inclusion criteria included females, aged 25 to 55, working in any administrative department for any duration and willing to participate in the study. The exclusion criteria were females not suffering from hypertension, diabetes mellitus. Results: Results revealed that about one fifth of the studied sample (20%) was hypertensive, while 26% and 68.5% respectively were diabetic and obese. No statistically significant relation between chronic illnesses (hypertension, diabetes and obesity) and healthy promoting lifestyle behaviors among study sample. Conclusion: Results suggest that participants do not consistently include health-promoting behaviors into their lifestyle, especially exercise, health responsibility and stress management. Recommendation: Develop a process to promote worksite wellness programs, to complete health assessments, and to support behavioral changes intended to promote healthy lifestyles.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.527
Teacher spread0.426 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nursing Education and PracticeSame topicHealth and Wellbeing ResearchFrench-language works237,207