MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3187235310 · doi:10.1186/s12889-021-11452-x

Building on existing tools to improve chronic disease prevention and screening in public health: a cluster randomized trial

2021· article· en· W3187235310 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Aïsha Lofters, Mary Ann O’Brien, Rinku Sutradhar, Andrew D. Pinto, Nancy N. Baxter, Peter Donnelly, R. Elliott, Richard H. Glazier, Joanne Huizinga, Richard G. Kyle, Donna Manca, Mary-Anne Pietrusiak, Linda Rabeneck, Benjamin C. Riordan, Peter Selby, Kawsika Sivayoganathan, Christopher K. Snider, Nicolette Sopcak, Kevin E. Thorpe, Jill Tinmouth, Becky Wall, Fei Zuo, Eva Grunfeld, Lawrence Paszat

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Public Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealth Promotion and Cardiovascular Prevention
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSt. Michael's HospitalSunnybrook Health Science CentreCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthUniversity of AlbertaRegional Municipality of DurhamInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesWomen's College HospitalCancer Care OntarioOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Cancer Society Research InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanadian Cancer SocietyUniversity of TorontoDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, University of TorontoWomen's College HospitalCancer Care Ontario
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialPublic healthBiostatisticsCluster randomised controlled trialFamily medicineIntervention (counseling)Physical therapyConfidence intervalNursingSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The BETTER (Building on Existing Tools to Improve Chronic Disease Prevention and Screening in Primary Care) intervention was designed to integrate the approach to chronic disease prevention and screening in primary care and demonstrated effective in a previous randomized trial. METHODS: We tested the effectiveness of the BETTER HEALTH intervention, a public health adaptation of BETTER, at improving participation in chronic disease prevention and screening actions for residents of low-income neighbourhoods in a cluster randomized trial, with ten low-income neighbourhoods in Durham Region Ontario randomized to immediate intervention vs. wait-list. The unit of analysis was the individual, and eligible participants were adults age 40-64 years residing in the neighbourhoods. Public health nurses trained as "prevention practitioners" held one prevention-focused visit with each participant. They provided participants with a tailored prevention prescription and supported them to set health-related goals. The primary outcome was a composite index: the number of evidence-based actions achieved at six months as a proportion of those for which participants were eligible at baseline. RESULTS: Of 126 participants (60 in immediate arm; 66 in wait-list arm), 125 were included in analyses (1 participant withdrew consent). In both arms, participants were eligible for a mean of 8.6 actions at baseline. At follow-up, participants in the immediate intervention arm met 64.5% of actions for which they were eligible versus 42.1% in the wait-list arm (rate ratio 1.53 [95% confidence interval 1.22-1.84]). CONCLUSION: Public health nurses using the BETTER HEALTH intervention led to a higher proportion of identified evidence-based prevention and screening actions achieved at six months for people living with socioeconomic disadvantage. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03052959 , registered February 10, 2017.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations23
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Public HealthSame topicHealth Promotion and Cardiovascular PreventionFrench-language works237,207