MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136198681 · doi:10.1093/her/cym031

Process evaluation of a multi-institutional community-based program for diabetes prevention among First Nations

2007· article· en· W2136198681 on OpenAlexaffabout
Amanda Rosecrans, Joel Gittelsohn, Lara S. Ho, Stewart B. Harris, Mariam Naqshbandi, Sangita Sharma

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Education Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Education
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFidelityPsychological interventionContext (archaeology)CurriculumMedical educationMedicineNutrition EducationEnvironmental healthGerontologyPsychologyNursingEngineeringGeographyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Epidemic rates of diabetes among Native North Americans demand novel solutions. Zhiiwaapenewin Akino'maagewin: Teaching to Prevent Diabetes was a community-based diabetes prevention program based in schools, food stores and health offices in seven First Nations in northwestern Ontario, Canada. Program interventions in these three institutions included implementation of Grades 3 and 4 healthy lifestyles curricula; stocking and labeling of healthier foods and healthy recipes cooking demonstrations and taste tests; and mass media efforts and community events held by health agencies. Qualitative and quantitative process data collected through surveys, logs and interviews assessed fidelity, dose, reach and context of the intervention to evaluate implementation and explain impact findings. School curricula implementation had moderate fidelity with 63% delivered as planned. Store activities had moderate fidelity: availability of all promoted foods was 70%, and appropriate shelf labels were posted 60% of the time. Cooking demonstrations were performed with 71% fidelity and high dose. A total of 156 posters were placed in community locations; radio, cable TV and newsletters were utilized. Interviews revealed that the program was culturally acceptable and relevant, and suggestions for improvement were made. These findings will be used to plan an expanded trial in several Native North American communities.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.104

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.323
GPT teacher head0.587
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations93
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Education ResearchSame topicDiabetes Management and EducationFrench-language works237,207