Feasibility of Remote Delivering an Exercise and Lifestyle Education Program for Individuals Living with Prediabetes and Diabetes in Brazil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to test the feasibility of remote delivering a 12-week exercise and lifestyle education program (ExLE) or a 12-week exercise program (Ex) for individuals with prediabetes and diabetes in terms of acceptability, implementation, practicality, and limited efficacy. The programs were internet- or telephone-based delivered, depending on the participants’ internet access and technology literacy. Of the 196 individuals screened, 15 were included in the study (internet-based delivery (n = 13); telephone-based delivery (n = 2)). Twelve participants completed the program they were randomized to, and most reported being satisfied with the study interventions (acceptability). Data collection procedures, weekly follow-up, study website visits, and educational materials were proper (implementation), and the adherence rate to study interventions ranged from 24% to 58% (practicality). Additionally, both programs (ExLE and Ex) seemed to promote beneficial changes in functional capacity (limited efficacy). The internet-based remote delivery of the interventions showed feasibility. Therefore, in future trials, exercise and educational interventions can be internet-based remote delivered to individuals with prediabetes and diabetes with internet access and technology literacy. In addition, some adjustments to eligibility criteria, study websites, more accessible ways of recording exercise sessions and using educational materials, and an initial supervised exercise session are recommended.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".