Outcomes of a type 2 diabetes education program adapted to the cultural contexts of Saudi women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore the outcomes of a pilot intervention of a type 2 diabetes (T2D) education program, based on international standards, and adapted to the cultural and religious contexts of Saudi women. METHODS: This study is an experiment of a pilot intervention carried out between August 2011 and January 2012 at the primary health clinics in Dammam. Women at risk of or diagnosed with T2D (N=35 including dropouts) were assigned to one of 2 groups; an intervention group participated in a pilot intervention of T2D education program, based on international standards and tailored to their cultural and religious contexts; and a usual care group received the usual care for diabetes in Saudi Arabia. Outcomes included blood glucose, body composition, 6-minute walk distance, life satisfaction, quality of life, and diabetes knowledge. The intervention group participated in a focus group of their program experience. Data analysis was based on mixed methods. RESULTS: Based on 95% confidence interval comparisons, improvements were noted in blood sugar, 6-minute walk distance, quality of life, and diabetes knowledge in participants of the intervention group. They also reported improvements in lifestyle-related health behaviors after the education program. CONCLUSION: Saudi women may benefit from a T2D education program based on international standards and adapted to their cultural and religious contexts.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".