Traditional knowledge-based lifestyle interventions in the prevention of obesity and type 2 diabetes in Indigenous children in Canada: a systematic review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Approximately 50% of all youth-onset type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in Canada occurs in Indigenous children. In adults, cardiovascular disease is one of the leading causes of mortality in First Nations communities, and diabetes is a significant contributor to the risk of developing this disorder. The early onset of diabetes may predispose these children to premature cardiovascular disease and influence their longevity and quality of life. As a result, the implementation of culturally tailored obesity and T2DM primary prevention programs is vital. This systematic review aims to assess the effectiveness of existing traditional knowledge-based lifestyle intervention programs on preventing obesity and T2DM in Indigenous children in Canada. METHODS: We will conduct database searches in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials. We will also conduct grey literature searches of central repository of trials ( ClinicalTrials.gov ), ProQuest Dissertations, Theses A&I, and Indigenous studies portal research tools. Reviewers will independently review titles, abstracts, and full-text articles retrieved from databases to assess potentially eligible studies, and relevant articles will be assessed for risk of bias and quality. The primary outcomes include the change in body mass index z-scores or a diagnosis of diabetes. The secondary outcomes include the change in measures of adiposity as well as lifestyle and metabolic profiles. A meta-analysis will be performed if two or more studies have used similar study designs, comparable intervention techniques , similar populations and measured similar outcomes. DISCUSSION: This review will provide a summary of current interventions to prevent obesity and T2DM in Indigenous children in Canada and help determine the gaps in the literature so that interventions can be developed to control the surge in pediatric T2DM in Indigenous communities. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42017072781.
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 | 0.053 | 0.055 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.013 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.047 | 0.004 |
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".