Behaviour change for type 2 diabetes: perspectives of general practitioners, primary care academics, and behaviour change experts on the use of the 5As framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The 5As framework is a recognized underpinning of behaviour change guidelines, teaching, and research in primary care. Supporting patients to improve their lifestyle behaviours, including diet and physical activity, is a common aspect of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) management. The 5As framework often informs behaviour change for patients with T2DM. OBJECTIVE: To explore the experience and perspectives of general practitioners (GPs) and primary care academics and behaviour change experts regarding using the 5As framework when caring for patients with T2DM to better understand how and why the 5As are effective in practice. METHODS: We recruited 20 practising GPs, primary care academics, and behaviour change experts for an individual semistructured interview and analysed the data using a realist evaluation approach. RESULTS: There were diverse accounts of how GPs use the 5As in practice and few of the participants could name each "A." The 5As were commonly regarded as a framework best suited to beginners and although GPs expressed they followed the broad direction of the 5As, they did not consciously follow the framework in an instructive manner. Elements that could enhance the 5As included more emphasis on motivational interviewing, changing how "Ask" is included in the consultation, and increased person-centredness. CONCLUSION: Although it is a ubiquitous framework in primary care, the 5As are understood in diverse ways and applied variably in practice. There is room to enhance how the 5As support behaviour change consultations to optimize outcomes in primary care.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".