Chronic Disease Self-Management Among Iranian Older Adults: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Implementing care models that emphasize chronic disease self-management (CDSM) strategies may be an effective approach to the growing prevalence of chronic conditions in Iran. We, therefore, conducted a scoping review on CDSM among older Iranians to identify existing gaps and opportunities to improve chronic disease care. Method: We conducted a search in CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE/PubMed, and Cochrane library. Selected articles were charted based on year of publication, language, objectives, methods, target chronic disease(s), sample demographics, self-management type, and key findings. Results: We selected 73 articles. The main components of CDSM addressed were social support, education, physical activity, nutrition, self-monitoring, spirituality, and financial support. Older Iranians reported low levels of physical activity. Conclusion: Enhancing the quality of CDSM research and provision of coaching to enhance older adults’ social and mental health are among the main strategies to enhance CDSM among the Iranian older population.
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 | 0.006 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".