Women’s experience with peer counselling and social support during a lifestyle intervention among women with a previous gestational diabetes pregnancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Women who are diagnosed with gestational diabetes mellitus have an increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes, but most receive little guidance regarding disease prevention. This study examined the role and usefulness of social support, including peer counselling in facilitating behaviour change as a part of a healthy eating and physical activity intervention among women with a previous gestational diabetes mellitus pregnancy. METHODS: We used a qualitative descriptive approach to investigate participants' experiences with the social support they received during the intervention. We used purposeful sampling and invited women and peer counsellors to participate in semi-structured interviews. Data were analyzed using content analysis. RESULTS: We interviewed nine women and two peer counsellors. Participants received emotional, appraisal, and informational types of social support from the peer counsellor and exercise specialist that they reported as useful. Additionally, participants' received informal emotional and instrumental support from family, friends, and colleagues that they found useful in supporting behaviour change. CONCLUSIONS: Different types of social support are important to encourage behaviour change. These findings provide insight into the types of social support women with previous gestational diabetes mellitus find useful, in addition to practical ways that social support can be incorporated into future interventions.
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 | 0.004 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".