MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4312385939 · doi:10.5937/afmnai39-34287

Dietary and lifestyle habits of patients with type 2 diabetes in Subotica

2021· article· en· W4312385939 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hajnalka Požar, Dragana Simin, Čaba Požar

Bibliographic record

VenueAFMN Biomedicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineType 2 diabetesDiabetes mellitusQuarter (Canadian coin)GerontologyFamily medicinePhysical therapyEnvironmental healthPediatricsEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The activities of the health care service in the control of diabetes and the improvement of glucoregulation of patients are primarily focused on lifestyle modification. The goal of this study was to review the recommendations in the field of adequate nutrition and lifestyle and to assess the health behavior of patients with type 2 diabetes in Subotica. The research was conducted in the form of a cross-sectional study in February 2017 at the Diabetes Counseling Center of the Health Center in Subotica, Serbia. The study included 114 patients with type 2 diabetes. The research instrument consisted of a customized survey questionnaire. Only a third of the patients actually consumed at least five meals a day, that was suggested as part of the treatment. Three-quarters of patients always prepared their own meals, but 41% of them never read the declarations about the ingredients of the food they consumed. Twenty percent of patients did not know how to assemble a healthy plate and what low-carbohydrate foods were. Two-thirds of patients used dietary supplements. A relatively small number, one-quarter of patients, consumed alcoholic beverages and 22 patients were active smokers. More than half of the patients exercised lightly, although 68% of them were dissatisfied with their body weight. We identified some deficiencies in the health behavior and lifestyle of people with diabetes. There is a recommendation to repeat the information on proper nutrition and the importance of physical activity in achieving ideal health and optimal glucoregulation during the educational work with patients.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.227 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAFMN Biomedicine→Same topicCardiovascular Health and Risk Factors→French-language works237,207→