Effects of Health Education of Diabetic Patient's Knowledge at Diabetic Health Centers, Khartoum State, Sudan: 2007-2010
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Educating and training diabetic patients is necessary for controlling and improving their health. METHODS: It was Quasi-experimental study design study. The study aimed to determine the effects of health education on the achievements of diabetic patients regarding control and improvement of their health status; at Diabetic Health Centers in Khartoum State, Sudan; 2007-2010. The target populations were diabetic patients, who attended the diabetic health centers to receive their treatment. Using simple random sampling 152 patients were selected (58 males and 94 females). Before and after comparison was done. Data was processed using SPSS and pair t-test was used to determine the effect of health education. P-value equal or less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. FINDINGS: Test for before and after comparison was found to be statistically significant (p<0.05) for diabetic patients. They gained more knowledge after the implementation of the program; particularly in the areas of the nature and signs and symptoms of the disease, signs and symptoms of hypo & hyperglycemia, causes and warning signs of foot problems, foot care, and importance of exercises. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Health education of diabetic patients is crucial for control of diabetes. Capacity building of diabetic health centers, strengthening diabetic patients association, and more research to study the effect of health education on diabetic patients were needed.
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".