MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313403573 · doi:10.29169/1927-5951.2022.12.07

The Cross-Sectional Study of Self Efficacy, Diet Compliance, and Blood Sugar Levels on Diabetes Mellitus Patients in Indonesia

2022· article· en· W4313403573 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Putri Dafriani, Roza Marlinda, Mahira Prameswari, Ratna Dewi, Fajrilhuda Yuniko

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pharmacy and Nutrition Sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPublic Health and Nutrition
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlood sugarDiabetes mellitusMedicineCross-sectional studyType 2 Diabetes MellitusSugarPublic healthEnvironmental healthFasting blood sugarSelf-efficacyCompliance (psychology)Internal medicineEndocrinologyFood scienceBiologyNursingPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diabetes mellitus (DM) has become a global health problem because the prevalence of diabetes mellitus continues to increase. Data from the West Sumatra Provincial Health Office (2018), DM cases totalled 44,280 cases, with a DM prevalence of 1.6% in 2018. Self-efficacy plays an important role in controlling blood sugar levels. Lack of self-efficacy causes the patient's blood sugar levels to become abnormal, resulting in a risk of complications. This research aims to study the relationship between self-efficacy and diet compliance with blood sugar levels in DM patients at the Andalas Public Health Center, Padang City. The research method is descriptive-analytic with a cross-sectional approach, with a total sample of 75 people. The results showed that 78.7% of the respondents have hyperglycemia, 72.0% with non-compliant to their diet limitation, and 68.0% with low self-efficacy. A relationship exists between diet compliance and blood sugar levels in type 2 DM patients. There is a relationship between self-efficacy and blood sugar levels in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients at the Padang Andalas Public Health Center in 2022.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pharmacy and Nutrition SciencesSame topicPublic Health and NutritionFrench-language works237,207