MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Knowledge of Diabetes among Adults at High Risk for Type 2 Diabetes in Kerala, India

2022· preprint· en· W4309935806 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Thirunavukkarasu Sathish, Kavumpurathu Raman Thankappan, Panniyammakal Jeemon, Brian Oldenburg

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiabetes mellitusMedicineType 2 diabetesQuarter (Canadian coin)Scale (ratio)GerontologyEnvironmental healthEndocrinologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We aimed to study the knowledge of diabetes among high-risk individuals for diabetes in the Indian state of Kerala. The baseline data collected from 1007 participants of the Kerala Diabetes Prevention Program were analyzed. Diabetes knowledge was assessed using a scale adapted from a large nationwide study conducted in India. The composite score of the scale ranges from 0 to 8. The mean age of participants was 46.0 (SD: 7.5) years, and 47.2% were female. The mean diabetes knowledge score was 6.9 (SD: 2.1), with 59.5% having the maximum possible score of 8. Of 1007 participants, 968 (96.1%) had heard the term diabetes, and of them, 84.7% know what diabetes is, 87.2% think more and more people are getting diabetes nowadays, 79.6% know that diabetes can cause complications in organs, and 75.9% know that diabetes can be prevented. While the level of diabetes knowledge was high among our participants, a quarter of them (24.1%) were not aware that diabetes can be prevented. Thus, there is a need for health promotion programs to increase the knowledge of diabetes prevention among high-risk individuals in Kerala.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.336
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 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.org→Same topicDiabetes Management and Education→French-language works237,207→