An Evaluation of FrancoForme
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of mortality globally. Telephone-delivered interventions targeting cardiovascular risk factors are gaining popularity. This study is an evaluation of FrancoForme, a cardiovascular risk factor reduction program for the primary and secondary prevention of CVD among French-speaking patients of Eastern Ontario. METHODS: This study reports on changes in cardiovascular risk factors, weekly exercise levels, and psychosocial characteristics including anxiety, depression, and quality of life upon program completion (3 months) and at 1 year after the start of the program. Repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to compare changes in outcomes between primary prevention risk groups (low, moderate, and high risk for CVD) and the secondary prevention group (ie, cardiac rehabilitation) at baseline, 3 months and 12 months. RESULTS: A total of 762 patients enrolled in FrancoForme between 2008 and 2015. At 3 months, all program completers (n = 507) experienced significant reductions for all cardiovascular risk factors except diastolic blood pressure. Minutes of self-reported exercise increased significantly by an average 90 minutes per week and all psychosocial variables improved. Significant group effects were observed across several risk factors. Among 12-month responders (n = 240), exercise, high-density lipoproteins, triglycerides, cholesterol, and all psychosocial variables were improved over baseline results. CONCLUSIONS: FrancoForme is unique in targeting both the primary and secondary prevention of CVD and removes several of the barriers to participating in a conventional CVD prevention program for French-speaking patients. FrancoForme is successful, receiving high satisfaction rates and resulting in significant improvements in cardiovascular risk factors, exercise, anxiety, and depression, as well as quality of life.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".