Identifying the Prevalence and Risk Factors Associated With Uncontrolled Diabetes (Type 2) in Al Buraimi Governorate, Sultanate of Oman
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: People with poorly controlled diabetes are likely to have shortened life, diabetes related complications and also reduced quality of life. WHO-EMRO region is considered to be the highest prevalence region accounted 43 million people. Among GCC countries, Oman has reported increased number of cases in recent years. OBJECTIVE: To identify the prevalence and risk factors associated with uncontrolled diabetes (Type 2) in a diabetic setting of Al Buraimi Polyclinic, AL Buraimi Governorate, Oman. METHODOLOGY: This Cross sectional retrospective study was conducted in diabetic clinic of Al Buraimi Polyclinic of primary health care, Al Buraimi Governorate Oman between January-April 2015. This study enrolled all diabetic patients type 2 (N=1164) who were registered during the period 2010-2014 in the polyclinic. Data was retrieved from the electronic diabetic register and patient’s electronic records in a diabetic setting at Al Buraimi Polyclinic. Descriptive statistics were applied to analyze the data. Differences between the groups were analyzed by using Chi-square test in SPSS 16 with p value ≤ 0.05 significance level. RESULTS: Prevalence of Uncontrolled Diabetes Mellitus Type 2 was found to be 623 (54%) among 1164 registered patients. 1108 (95%) were Omani nationals and 56 (5%) were non-Omani nationals with mean age 51±12 and male predominance 632 (54%) with higher significance (p-value=0.009). A significant association was found between treatment and glycemic control (p-value = 0.000) with 926 (80%) were on oral hypoglycemic agents. Moreover, HbA1c was significantly associated with total cholesterol, Low density lipoprotein and Triglyceride with (p-value=0 .000). 629 (54%). Diabetic patients were having family history as a common risk factor. CONCLUSION: Uncontrolled diabetes mellitus with prevalence >50% implies an alarming challenge to health care system. An intervention should be focused on patient’s education, emphasizing on life modification strategies. Furthermore, multidisciplinary approach is needed for the effective care of diabetes in primary health care.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".