The role of lifestyle changes to diet, physical activity, and sleep during Ramadan in controlling metabolic syndrome in adults: a scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This scoping review aimed to investigate the role of lifestyle changes during Ramadan in controlling metabolic syndrome (MetS) in adults. The lifestyle factors investigated were diet, physical activity (PA) and sleep. The review was guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews, Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist, and Joanna Briggs Institute methodological frameworks. The Web of Science, Google Scholar, PubMed, CINAHL (EBSCO), and Scopus databases were searched using the following terms: “diet”, “physical activity”, “sleep” and/or “lifestyle” with “Ramadan”, “Ramadan month” or “the month of Ramadan”. The selection included all research articles published from January 1998 until the end of June 2023. Only full-text studies that met the selection criteria were reviewed. A lack of robust evidence exists on the impact of lifestyle changes during Ramadan on MetS components. The scarcity of cohort studies in this area is likely because they could only be conducted during a particular month each year. However, the available evidence shows that lifestyle changes during Ramadan, including PA, diet and sleep, may be significant in MetS control. The evidence suggests that diet is the most influential factor on MetS components during Ramadan month, whereas sleep is the least influential. Ramadan represents an opportunity for patients to enhance their control of MetS components by combining a healthy diet with PA and good sleep hygiene. Further robust studies are required to develop an in-depth understanding of the impact of lifestyle changes during Ramadan on MetS components.
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 | 0.018 | 0.059 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".