Analysis of Self-Care Activities in Type 2 Diabetes in Brazil: Protocol for a Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus is a chronic disease that is growing worldwide. It is estimated that 15.7 million people aged between 20 and 79 years live with diabetes in Brazil, and the majority of cases are type 2 diabetes (T2D). To successfully manage diabetes, the patient needs to develop self-care activities. However, there is limited understanding of what self-care activities are performed by people with T2D in Brazil. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify and map studies that evaluate self-care activities in T2D in Brazil. METHODS: This is a scoping review protocol structured according to the methodological guidelines of the Joanna Briggs Institute. Six databases and gray literature were used. The process of searching, identifying, and evaluating the papers was carried out by 2 independent reviewers, guided by the assumptions established by the Joanna Briggs Institute. We sought to answer the following guiding question: How are self-care activities for people with T2D evaluated in Brazil? We included papers and publications in any language, from public and private domains, and with different methodological approaches. RESULTS: Initial database searches produced a total of 681 results. These papers will be critically analyzed, and relevant information will be extracted. Quantitative and qualitative results of the papers reviewed will be presented to respond to the study's objective. We intend to publish the scoping review in the first half of 2024. CONCLUSIONS: The protocol for this scoping review will evaluate the main self-care activities carried out by adults and older people with T2D in Brazil. The results may help identify knowledge gaps and contribute to future research and diabetes education interventions. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/49105.
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 | 0.129 | 0.125 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.014 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.018 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.058 | 0.012 |
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".