MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3193334299 · doi:10.2196/27454

Dietary Intake and Health Status of Elderly Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Cross-sectional Study Using a Mobile App in Primary Care

2021· article· en· W3193334299 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Joane Diomara Coleone, Ericles Andrei Bellei, Mateus Klein Roman, Vanessa Ramos Kirsten, Ana Carolina Bertoletti De Marchi

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio Grande do SulConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsMedicineAnthropometryContext (archaeology)Environmental healthType 2 Diabetes MellitusDiabetes mellitusCross-sectional studyType 2 diabetesGerontologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Healthy dietary intake reduces the risk of complications of diabetes mellitus. Using assessment methods helps to understand these circumstances, and an electronic application may optimize this practice. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we aimed to (1) assess the dietary intake and health status of elderly patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in primary care, (2) use a mobile app as a tool for data collection and analysis in the context of primary care, and (3) verify the perceptions of multidisciplinary health professionals regarding app use. METHODS: First, we developed a mobile app comprised of the questions of the Food and Nutrition Surveillance System (SISVAN) of Brazil, which includes a food frequency questionnaire of food categories with a recall of the previous 7 days. Thereafter, we used the app to collect data on the health status and dietary intake of 154 participants, aged 60-96 years, diagnosed with T2DM, and under treatment in primary care centers in the northern region of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. We also collected participants' demographic, anthropometric, biochemical, and lifestyle variables. The associations between dietary intake and other variables were tested using chi-square tests with a 5% significance level. Regarding the app, we assessed usability and acceptance with 20 health professionals. RESULTS: Between August 2018 and December 2018, participants had an intake in line with recommended guidelines for raw salads (57.1%), fruits (76.6%), milk products (68.2%), fried foods (72.7%), savory biscuits (60.4%), cookies or sweets (72.1%), and sugary drinks (92.9%) Meanwhile, the consumption of beans (59.7%), pulses and cooked vegetables (73.4%), and processed meat products (59.7%) was not in line with the guidelines. There were statistically significant differences in meeting the recommended guidelines among participants of different genders (P=.006 and P=.035 for the intake of fried foods and sugary drinks, respectively), place of residence (P=.034 for the intake of cookies and sweets), family history of diabetes (P<.001 for the intake of beans), physical activity engagement (P=.003 for the intake fresh fruits), history of smoking (P=.001 for the intake of raw salads), and presence of coronary disease (P=.050 for the intake of pulses and cooked vegetables). The assessment of usability resulted in a mean score of 71.75 points. Similarly, the assessment of the 15 acceptance questions revealed high scores, and the qualitative questions revealed positive perceptions. CONCLUSIONS: We identified that most participants complied with recommended intake guidelines for 7 of 10 categories in the SISVAN guidelines. However, most participants were overweight and had nutritional and clinical disorders, which justifies further investigations in this population. The app was well-rated by health professionals and considered a useful and promising tool for collecting and analyzing data in primary care settings.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.509
Teacher spread0.399 · 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 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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative Research→Same topicMobile Health and mHealth Applications→French-language works237,207→