MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2596647136

ESTRATEGIA EDUCATIVA Y CAPACIDAD DE AUTOCUIDADO EN PERSONAS CON DIABETES MELLITUS TIPO 2

2016· article· es· W2596647136 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Luis Alfredo Mendoza Herrera, M. Brenda Eugenia Franco Corona

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNursing care and research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPersonaHumanitiesMedicineGerontologyPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduccion: en el mundo hay cerca de 347 millones de personas con diabetes, la OMS preve se convierta para el 2030 en la septima causa mundial de muerte; senala que cada 10 segundos una persona muere por causas relacionadas a la diabetes, en Mexico es la primera causa de muerte entre las mujeres y la segunda entre los hombres. Objetivo: Determinar la estrategia educativa y la capacidad de autocuidado de la persona con Diabetes Mellitus (DM). Materiales: estudio descriptivo, longitudinal, participaron pacientes con DM tipo 2 de la Comunidad Canada de Bustos, se aplico la Escala de capacidad de autocuidado y un cuestionario sobre conocimientos. Resultados: participaron 36 pacientes, 28(77.7%) de la comunidad Canada de Bustos y 8(22.2%) del Capulin, rango de edad 26-63 anos, con una buena (58.3%) capacidad de autocuidado. Discusion: La DM es un problema de salud publica a nivel mundial, la implementacion de tecnicas educativas son una herramienta a favor de la salud general y oral para mejorar la calidad de vida. Conclusion: Es necesaria la implementacion de campanas educativas debido a que los pacientes no tienen conocimiento respecto a las complicaciones que puede generar la enfermedad y que pueden poner en riesgo su vida.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.183

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.376 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNursing care and researchFrench-language works237,207