A preliminary study on diabetes self-management education and glycemic control among patients with diabetes mellitus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was aimed to assess the effectiveness of diabetes self-management education (DSME) in the improvement of glycemic control among patients with type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) in Batticaloa District, Sri Lanka. The study was a prospective interventional study and conducted as a preliminary study at medical clinic, Base hospital, Kaluwanchikudy, Batticaloa. Thirty patients with T2DM were included based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. A structured individual diabetes self-management education for 10 hours (one hour per week) was delivered to diabetic patients by the trained Nurse Health Educator. Glycosylate hemoglobin (HbA1c) was assessed as a main outcome measure and Fasting Blood Sugar (FBS), Body Mass Index (BMI) of each patient were also measured and recorded before and after the intervention. The respondent rate was 96.7% (n = 29). Majority of them were females (n = 25, 86.2%). A Wilcoxon signed rank test showed that DSME had a statistically significant reduction in HbA1c [8.60 (IQR 2.60) vs. 7.40 (IQR 2.10), p = .000] and FBS level [159.00 (IQR 77.50) vs. 134.00 (IQR 40.50), p = .002] at 3 months of intervention. The mean BMI at baseline was higher compared to 3 months of intervention [24.88 (SD ± 3.06) vs. 24.19 (SD ± 2.79)] which was statistically significant (p = .000). Majority of participants (n = 22, 75.9%) had improved their HbA1c level by ≥ 0.5% in 3 months. The diabetes self-management education is an effective measure in improving glycemic control and other clinical parameters among patients with T2DM. Thus, DSME needs to be implemented among clinic patients with T2DM for the better outcome and the preventions of complications.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".