MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402994886 · doi:10.4103/jrms.jrms_20_23

Effect of low-frequency blood glucose self-monitoring on glycosylated hemoglobin levels among older adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus

2024· article· en· W4402994886 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Sahebkar, Atousa Ariafar, Farnush Attarzadeh, Najmeh Rahimi, Susan J Malkemes, Mohammad Hassan Rakhshani, Abdolghader Assarroudi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Research in Medical Sciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHemoglobinDiabetes mellitusInsulinBlood sugarInternal medicineRandomized controlled trialType 2 Diabetes MellitusFasting blood sugarType 2 diabetesEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Reducing the frequency of self-monitoring of blood sugar, due to needle phobia, pain, stress, and costs associated with the procedure, can improve patient compliance and quality of life, provided that adequate blood sugar control is maintained. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of low-frequency blood glucose self-monitoring (LFBGSM) on glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1 C ) levels among older adults living with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), treated with or without insulin. Materials and Methods: This randomized controlled trial with a parallel design was conducted on 121 older adults with T2DM in Sabzevar, Iran, between 2018 and 2020. Initially, subjects were stratified based on the type of treatment (with or without insulin) and then randomly assigned to intervention (LFBGSM) and control (no blood glucose self-monitoring [no-BGSM]) groups. HbA1 C levels were measured at the beginning of the study and 3 months later for all study groups. Results: The mean age of participants treated with and without insulin was 64.3 ± 9.60 and 64.7 ± 5.01 years, respectively. The ANCOVA test revealed a significant difference in the mean HbA1 C levels among the four groups 3 months postintervention ( P < 0.001). The HbA1 C scores significantly decreased in the LFBGSM groups and increased in the no-BGSM groups at 3 months postintervention (insulin/LFBGSM, insulin/no-BGSM, noninsulin/LFBGSM, and noninsulin/no-BGSM: 7.74 ± 0.76, 8.34 ± 1.53, 7.70 ± 0.75, and 8.14 ± 1.11, respectively) compared to baseline (8.25 ± 0.67, 8.03 ± 0.64, 8.08 ± 0.69, and 7.83 ± 0.74, respectively). The least significant difference post hoc tests showed significant differences between specific groups, emphasizing subtle responses to interventions ( P values ranging from 0.001 to 0.929). Conclusion: Findings suggest a significant reduction in HbA1 C scores within the LFBGSM groups, while a discernible increase is observed in the no-BGSM groups over the 3 months. These findings underscore the efficacy of the interventions and emphasize the crucial role of personalized approaches in optimizing glycemic control for individuals with diabetes.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.283
Threshold uncertainty score0.389

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.353 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Research in Medical SciencesSame topicDiabetes Management and EducationFrench-language works237,207