Examining the Effects of Mindful Eating Training on Adherence to a Carbohydrate-Restricted Diet in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes (the DELISH Study): Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Diet patterns have a profound influence on glycemic control for individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and craving-related eating is an important obstacle to dietary adherence. A growing body of research suggests that carbohydrate-restricted (CR) diets can improve glycemic control and reduce medication dependence in T2DM. However, limited data speak to the effects of long-term adherence to CR diets. Mindful eating training has been shown to reduce craving-related eating in overweight populations but has yet to be examined as a behavioral support for dietary adherence in T2DM. This trial examines behavioral mechanisms, particularly craving-related eating, through which mindful eating training might improve adherence to CR dietary recommendations in T2DM. This will clarify the importance of focusing on craving-related eating in the optimization of dietary adherence interventions. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this trial is to determine whether providing training in mindful eating increases adherence to a CR dietary recommendation in T2DM. METHODS: We are randomizing 60 participants to receive a CR diet with or without mindful eating training (12-week group intervention) and are following participants for 12 weeks after intervention completion. We hypothesize that participants who receive mindful eating training (relative to those who do not) will demonstrate greater adherence to the CR diet. RESULTS: Our primary outcome is change in craving-related eating, as assessed using an ecological momentary assessment mobile phone-based platform. Secondary behavioral pathway outcomes include changes in stress-related eating, impulsivity, glycemic control, weight change, dietary adherence, and resumption of dietary adherence after dietary nonadherence. CONCLUSIONS: This theory-driven trial will shed light on the impact of mindfulness training on mechanisms that may impact dietary adherence in T2DM. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03207711; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03207711 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/73pXscwaU). INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/11002.
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 | 0.037 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.053 | 0.009 |
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".