Effect of a behavioral intervention of the SALdável program to reduce salt intake among hypertensive women: A randomized controlled pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Excessive salt intake has been directly associated with cardiovascular diseases, especially hypertension, and non-cardiovascular diseases. Despite the current recommendations, salt intake remains high, indicating the need to develop theory-based interventions aimed at reducing this intake. AIM: The purpose of this study was to test the impact of a theory-based intervention - the SALdável Program - to promote the use of less than 4 g of salt/day during cooking. METHODS: This was a two-arm parallel-group randomized study. A total of 92 hypertensive women were randomly assigned to an intervention or control group. The intervention was aimed at motivating participants to reduce salt addition by increasing self-efficacy and counteracting the negative influence of habit. Primary outcomes were the behavioral question of salt addition and total salt addition, secondary outcomes were overall salt intake, provided by 24-hour urinary sodium excretion, and psychosocial variables (intention, self-efficacy, and habit). RESULTS: At three-month follow-up, the intervention group improved significantly more than the control group regarding salt addition measures (p-values between 0.05 and 0.001) and psychosocial variables (all p-values ⩽0.001). The reduction in 24-hour urinary sodium excretion was not significant. CONCLUSION: The findings showed that this theory-based intervention was effective to motivate and change the behavior of hypertensive women regarding daily salt use in cooking meals. This was accomplished by means of improvements in intention and self-efficacy and reduction of the habit of using more than 4 g of salt/day during cooking.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".