Baseline Assessment for a Multi‐institutional Diabetes Prevention Program for First Nations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diabetes has reached epidemic proportions in First Nations but there is limited information on physical activity, food and psychosocial risk factors, especially in remote communities. A baseline survey of main food preparers and shoppers (n=149 randomly selected household, remote n=76, semi‐remote n=73) on seven reserves was conducted to assess physical activity and food behaviors and related psychosocial factors using multi‐question scales. Respondents on remote reserves were more likely to have less education (>12 years: 39.47% vs. 62.96%, p=0.008) and come from larger households (mean household members: 4.28 vs. 3.77, p=0.107). Related to this, respondents on remote reserves had lower physical activity and food knowledge scores (2.9 vs. 3.6, p=0.022) and lower outcome expectations for related behaviors (4.04 vs. 4.33, p=0.008). These baseline findings are being used to evaluate a multi‐institutional trial in the communities to prevent diabetes. This work was supported by the American Diabetes Association and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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".