MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2549252373 · doi:10.23937/2377-3634/1410045

Perceptions of a Culturally Tailored Adapted Program to Prevent Type 2 Diabetes

2015· article· en· W2549252373 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Angela Cooper Brathwaite

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Diabetes and Clinical Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNonprobability samplingIntervention (counseling)Thematic analysisFocus groupType 2 diabetesPerceptionQualitative researchMedicineQualitative propertyPsychologyCulturally appropriateGerontologyClinical psychologyNursingDiabetes mellitusPopulationEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To explore African and Caribbean immigrants’ perceptions of a culturally tailored intervention to prevent type 2 diabetes. Methods: Using a purposive sampling scheme, 29 participants (26 women and 3 men, mean age 48 years and average length of residency of 22 years in Canada) participated in this study. The researchers used in-depth focus groups and individual surveys to collect qualitative data from participants. Following these interviews, participants individually reviewed the intervention and provided written feedback on their perceptions of the intervention. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Findings: Three themes emerged from the data: motivating factors to engage in physical activity and healthy eating, barriers that prohibit engaging in physical activity and increasing knowledge about food selection and modification of diet. In addition to the themes, participants had positive perceptions of the intervention. Eighty six percent rated the intervention as very useful and 83% were very satisfied with its contents. They reported that the intervention was culturally consistent with their beliefs, values and cultural practices in preventing type 2 diabetes. Conclusion: Perceptions of this culturally tailored intervention provided valuable evidence to assist the researchers in moving forward to the next level of research development such as evaluating the effectiveness of the intervention on the targeted groups’ outcomes: self-care knowledge, performance of physical activity, healthy eating practices and self-efficacy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.324
Threshold uncertainty score0.454

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.161
GPT teacher head0.517
Teacher spread0.356 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Diabetes and Clinical ResearchSame topicDiabetes Management and EducationFrench-language works237,207