Effects of a Salutogenic Healthy Eating Program in Type 2 Diabetes (the SALUD Study): Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Healthy eating can improve the course of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) considerably. As changing eating behaviors in everyday is challenging, there is a need for a nutritional strategy with an eye for everyday life of people with T2DM. A theory centered around the everyday life context is salutogenesis. Salutogenic principles have been operationalized in a new nutritional program for T2DM on food literacy and well-being: the Salutogenic Intervention for Type 2 Diabetes (SALUD) program. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to describe the protocol of the invention study that will examine the quantitative and qualitative effects of the SALUD program. METHODS: A semiblinded randomized controlled trial will be performed in the Netherlands. A sample size of 56 (including a 30% dropout rate) people with T2DM has been calculated, of whom half (n=28, 50%) will follow the SALUD program (intervention) and half (n=28, 50%) will receive usual care (control). Recruitment strategies consist of advertisement via local health care professionals, posters, social media, and local newspapers. The SALUD program consists of 12 weekly web-based group sessions under the supervision of a certified lifestyle coach. Fidelity of the delivery is guaranteed by selecting a salutogenic coach, use of an intervention manual, training of the coach, weekly evaluation forms, and recording several sessions. The theoretical salutogenic principle of the intervention is mobilizing 2 important psychosocial resources required for organizing healthy eating in everyday life: self-identity and social support. Measurements will be performed at 3 times: at baseline (T0), after 12 weeks (postintervention; T1), and after 24 weeks (follow-up; T2). The primary outcome is food literacy, measured with the self-perceived food literacy scale questionnaire (expected effect size=0.9). Secondary outcomes are self-efficacy, quality of life, sense of coherence, diet quality, body weight, BMI, and waist-hip ratio. All outcomes will be tested with linear mixed models, following an intention-to-treat approach and standard principles of randomized controlled trials. In addition, a qualitative analysis will be performed. RESULTS: The proposed study will provide useful information on the effects of a salutogenic program on healthy eating and well-being in people with T2DM in everyday life. Recruitment started on October 1, 2021. The intervention participants followed the SALUD program between January and August, 2022. The acquisition of the data was completed on August 1, 2022; publications are expected in 2023. CONCLUSIONS: This study will be one of the first salutogenic interventions for T2DM, which will provide valuable information on what salutogenic intervention entail. The SALUD program may serve as a concrete, web-based tool. The combination of quantitative and qualitative measures allows a comprehensive evaluation of effects. These insights can be used for further optimalization of T2DM interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Registry, NL8963; https://trialsearch.who.int/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=NL8963. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/40490.
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 | 0.054 | 0.043 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.081 | 0.015 |
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".