MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200112988 · doi:10.1002/nop2.1133

The influence of the disclosure of diabetes on the cognitive, physical ability and diabetes self‐management in diabetic employed adults in Saudi Arabia

2021· article· en· W4200112988 on OpenAlexaff
Sitah Alshutwi, Eman Miligi, Lujain Alhumidan, Adel F. Almutairi

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing Open · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Education
Canadian institutionsHeritage College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiabetes mellitusMedicineDiabetes managementChecklistDescriptive statisticsSelf-managementResearch designType 2 diabetesClinical psychologyPhysical therapyGerontologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Diabetes is a serious medical condition that may cause blindness, renal failure and amputation of the lower limbs, stroke and myocardial infarction. The global incidence of diabetes increases continuously. The self-management of diabetes can be problematic and burdensome, especially if employed individuals choose not to reveal their illness. The workplace has been highlighted as an important element that may impact how employed individuals, diagnosed with diabetes and managed their illness. AIM: To describe the influence of diabetes disclosure on the cognitive, physical ability and diabetes self-management of employed adults with diabetes in Saudi Arabia. DESIGN: A descriptive correlational study. METHODS: This study used a self-administered questionnaire, including the Checklist Individual Strength and Perceived Diabetes Self-Management Scale, for data collection. The sample size was 250 employed adults with diabetes. The data were analysed using descriptive statistics, Spearman's correlation coefficient and bivariate analysis. RESULTS: A significant correlation was found between diabetes self-management and support from co-workers (r = .55, p < .05), and the employees who received more support from their co-workers were able to perform diabetes self-management. The results also indicate that employees who received support at their workplace reported improved concentration, motivation and activity (r = .41, p < .05). CONCLUSION: It is essential for top management and policymakers to implement supportive programmes in the workplace, and considering a constant, not rotating, work schedule.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.275

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.276 · 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.

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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNursing OpenSame topicDiabetes Management and EducationFrench-language works237,207