MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3017054236 · doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckaa037

Implementing Package of Essential Non-communicable Disease Interventions in the Republic of Moldova—a feasibility study

2020· article· en· W3017054236 on OpenAlexaff
Tiina Laatikainen, Laura Inglin, Dylan Collins, Angela Ciobanu, Ghenadie Curocichin, Virginia Șalaru, Tatiana Zatic, Angela Anisei, Diana Chiosa, Maria Munteanu, Zinaida Alexa, Jill Farrington

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Public Health · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicGlobal Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersWorld Health Organization
KeywordsMedicinePsychological interventionNon-communicable diseaseIntervention (counseling)Logistic regressionDiseaseDisease managementEmergency medicineHealth careFamily medicinePhysical therapyEnvironmental healthInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to determine the feasibility of implementing and evaluating the World Health Organization Package of Essential Non-communicable Disease Interventions (WHO PEN) approach in primary healthcare in the Republic of Moldova. METHODS: According to our published a priori methods, 20 primary care clinics were randomized to 10 intervention and 10 control clinics. The intervention consisted of implementation of adapted WHO PEN guidelines and structured training for health workers; the control clinics continued with usual care. Data were gathered from paper-based patient records in July 2017 and August 2018 resulting in a total of 1174 and 995 patients in intervention and control clinics at baseline and 1329 and 1256 at follow-up. Pre-defined indicators describing assessment of risk factors and total cardiovascular risk, prescribing medications and treatment outcomes were calculated. Differences between baseline and follow-up as well as between intervention and control clinics were calculated using logistic and linear regression models and by assessing interaction effects. RESULTS: Improvements were seen in recording smoking status, activity to measure HbA1c among diabetes patients and achieving control in hypertension treatment. Improvement was also seen in identification of patients with hypertension or diabetes. Less improvement or even deterioration was seen in assessing total risk or prescribing statins for high-risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible to evaluate the quality and management of patients with non-communicable diseases in low-resource settings from routine data. Modest improvements in risk factor identification and management can be achieved in a relatively short period of time.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.045
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.172
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0450.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.208
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Public HealthSame topicGlobal Public Health Policies and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207