MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2952005084 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v11n7p90

What are the Experiences and Needs of Primary Care Nurses in Caring for Patients With Type 2 Diabetes in a Rural Village in South Africa? An Exploratory Study

2019· article· en· W2952005084 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ednah Virginia Sechabe, Tebogo Maria Mothiba, Hilde Bastiaens

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversiteit AntwerpenVlaamse Interuniversitaire Raad
KeywordsNursingMedicineQualitative researchExploratory researchHealth carePrimary careProfessional developmentQuality (philosophy)Family medicineMedical education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since 1994, the emphasis in the provision of health services in South Africa has shifted from hospital-based care to a community-based comprehensive primary health care system, especially important in the management of chronic diseases. However, primary health care professional nurses are not well trained to manage chronic conditions like type 2 diabetes. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the experiences and needs of primary care nurses as a basis for the development of a training programme for professional nurses who care for T2D patients. A qualitative descriptive approach was employed, using individual interviews with primary health care nurses caring for T2D patients in the Ga-Dikgale village clinics. Ethical considerations were observed throughout the study and quality supportive measures were employed. Three main themes emerged from the study findings which address the current practices and knowledge of professional nurses related to care provided to diabetes patients, the challenges experienced by professional nurses during the provision of care to diabetes patients on treatment and their training experiences, gaps and needs. A need for continuing education for professional nurses related to the care of patients with diabetes was identified. The results of this study will be used to develop a training programme to improve the knowledge and skills of professional nurses and to improve the quality of care of patients with type 2 diabetes.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health Science→Same topicDiabetes Management and Education→French-language works237,207→