Diet modification challenges faced by marginalized and nonmarginalized adults with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and qualitative meta-synthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives Diet modification is an important part of the prevention and treatment of type 2 diabetes, but sustained dietary change remains elusive for many individuals. This paper describes and interprets the barriers to diet modification from the perspective of people with type 2 diabetes, paying particular attention to the experiences of people who experience social marginalization. Methods A systematic review of primary, empirical qualitative research was performed, capturing 120 relevant studies published between 2002 and 2015. Qualitative meta-synthesis was used to provide an integrative analysis of this knowledge. Results Due to the central role of food in social life, dietary change affects all aspects of a person's life, and barriers related to self-discipline, emotions, family and social support, social significance of food, and knowledge were identified. These barriers are inter-linked and overlapping. Social marginalization magnifies barriers; people who face social marginalization are trying to make the same changes as other people with diabetes with fewer socio-material resources in the face of greater challenges. Discussion A social-ecological model of behavior supports our findings of challenges at all levels, and highlights the need for interventions and counseling strategies that address the social and environmental factors that shape and sustain dietary change.
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 | 0.024 | 0.077 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".