Integration of sex and gender in a continuing professional development course on diabetes and depression: a mixed methods feasibility study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Assess the feasibility and impact of a continuous professional development (CPD) course on type 2 diabetes and depression on health professionals' intention to include sex and gender considerations in patient care. DESIGN AND SETTING: In collaboration with CPD organisations and patient-partners, we conducted a mixed-methods feasibility controlled trial with postintervention measures in three Canadian provinces. PARTICIPANTS: Of 178 eligible health professionals, 127 completed questionnaires and 67 participated in semistructured group discussions. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: An interactive 1 hour CPD course, codesigned with patient-partners, on diabetes and depression that included sex and gender considerations (innovation) was compared with a similar course that did not include them (comparator). OUTCOMES: Feasibility of recruitment and retention of CPD organisations and patient-partners throughout the study; adherence to planned activities; health professionals' intention to include sex and gender considerations in patient care as measured by the CPD-Reaction questionnaire; and barriers and facilitators using the Theoretical Domains Framework. RESULTS: All recruited CPD organisations and patient-partners remained engaged throughout the study. All planned CPD courses occurred. Overall, 71% of eligible health professionals participated (63% under 44 years old; 79.5% women; 67.7% practising in French; 66.9% practising in Quebec; 78.8% in urban practice). After training, mean intention scores for the innovation (n=49) and control groups (n=78) were 5.65±0.19 and 5.19±0.15, respectively. Mean difference was -0.47 (CI -0.95 to 0.01; p=0.06). Adjusted for age, gender and practice settings, mean difference was -0.57 (CI -1.09 to -0.05; p=0.03). We identified eight theoretical domains related to barriers and six related to facilitators for providing sex-adapted and gender-adapted diabetes and depression care. CONCLUSIONS: CPD training on diabetes and depression that includes sex and gender considerations is feasible and, compared with CPD training that does not, may prompt health professionals to modify their care. Addressing identified barriers and facilitators could increase intention. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03928132 with ClinicalTrials.gov; Post-results.
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 | 0.018 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".