MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2910582261 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v11n2p70

Dietary and Physical Activity Modifications Intervention for Older People

2019· article· en· W2910582261 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Trias Mahmudiono, Stefania Widya Setyaningtyas, Qonita Rachmah, Mahmud Aditya Rifqi, Diah Indriani, Triska Susila Nindya, Hario Megatsari, Wantanee Kriengsinyos

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiet and metabolism studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversitas Airlangga
KeywordsNutrition EducationIntervention (counseling)Psychological interventionMedicineGerontologyDiabetes mellitusSocial cognitive theoryPhysical activityOlder peopleAnalysis of variancePhysical therapyPhysical educationHealth educationPsychologyPublic healthNursingDevelopmental psychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Diet and physical activity modification such as specialized gymnastic, Taichi, or yoga could reduce either blood glucose or HbA1C level in diabetes patients among older people. This study was a behaviorally based nutrition education intervention for older people in reducing their HbA1C and total cholesterol level in urban area in Indonesia. DESIGN: This was quasi experimental study with three-month behavioral intervention based on Social Cognitive Theory. SETTING: The study was held in Jagir Sub-district located in urban area of Surabaya. Preliminary study showed proportion of hypercholesterolemia and diabetes mellitus among older people in Jagir Sub-district was respectively 21.37% and 2.74%. PARTICIPANTS: 60 older people in Jagir Sub-district was divided into 5 groups consist of: control, physical activity education only, nutrition education only, combination of physical activity and nutrition education, and education material only group. INTERVENTIONS: The intervention was consisted of six sessions physical activity or nutrition education, or both of it performed by trained nutrition science students. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes of this study were HbA1C (%) and total cholesterol (mg/dL) levels. ANALYSIS: The normal distributed or transformed data was analyzed using mixed factorial ANOVA in order to test the difference between groups.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.356 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health Science→Same topicDiet and metabolism studies→French-language works237,207→