Effect of educational nursing program on quality of life for patients with type II diabetes mellitus at Assiut University Hospital
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Diabetes mellitus constantly changes a patient’s life. Patient’s self care, consisting of daily insulin injections or oral anti-diabetic agents, self monitoring of blood glucose and diabetic diet has an impact on QOL. The aim of the present study was to assess quality of life for patients with type II diabetes mellitus, to develop and implement an educational nursing program for patients with type II diabetes mellitus, to evaluate the effect of applying the educational nursing program on quality of life for patients with type II diabetes mellitus pre and after two months from application of educational program.Methods: The study was conducted in the internal medicine department, internal medicine and diabetes clinic at University Hospital (Assiut–Egypt). Sixty adult patients were divided randomly equally into two groups (study group and control group) thirty for each group. The following tools were utilized for data collection: first tool “Structured patient interview questionnaire sheet”; it included two parts (socio-demographic characteristic and medical data), second tool “World Health Organization Quality of life (WHOQOL-WHO) scale”.Results: In the control group 40% of diabetic patients had good quality of life score while in the study group 100% had good quality of life after application of the educational program.Conclusions: The results of the present study concluded that: according to the control group, there was no statistically significant difference pre and post program in all domains of quality of life scale. According to the study group there was a highly significant effect of educational program on promotion of quality of life in physical, psychological, and social domains scale. Recommendations: Providing a written educational nursing program is of great importance for the patients.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".