The effect of spiritual care on spiritual well-beingand quality of life in diabetic patients: a clinical trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AMA Magharei M, Tabatabaei H, Momennasab M. The effect of spiritual care on spiritual well-being and quality of life in diabetic patients: a clinical trial. Family Medicine & Primary Care Review. 2023;25(4):413-419. doi:10.5114/fmpcr.2021.110358. APA Magharei, M., Tabatabaei, H., & Momennasab, M. (2023). The effect of spiritual care on spiritual well-being and quality of life in diabetic patients: a clinical trial. Family Medicine & Primary Care Review, 25(4), 413-419. https://doi.org/10.5114/fmpcr.2021.110358 Chicago Magharei, Mahboobeh, Hadise Sadat Tabatabaei, and Marzieh Momennasab. 2023. "The effect of spiritual care on spiritual well-being and quality of life in diabetic patients: a clinical trial". Family Medicine & Primary Care Review 25 (4): 413-419. doi:10.5114/fmpcr.2021.110358. Harvard Magharei, M., Tabatabaei, H., and Momennasab, M. (2023). The effect of spiritual care on spiritual well-being and quality of life in diabetic patients: a clinical trial. Family Medicine & Primary Care Review, 25(4), pp.413-419. https://doi.org/10.5114/fmpcr.2021.110358 MLA Magharei, Mahboobeh et al. "The effect of spiritual care on spiritual well-being and quality of life in diabetic patients: a clinical trial." Family Medicine & Primary Care Review, vol. 25, no. 4, 2023, pp. 413-419. doi:10.5114/fmpcr.2021.110358. Vancouver Magharei M, Tabatabaei H, Momennasab M. The effect of spiritual care on spiritual well-being and quality of life in diabetic patients: a clinical trial. Family Medicine & Primary Care Review. 2023;25(4):413-419. doi:10.5114/fmpcr.2021.110358.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".