MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4409415099 · doi:10.2196/67319

Effectiveness of a Person-Centered and Culturally Sensitive Course of Treatment in Arabic-, Turkish-, and Urdu-Speaking Individuals With Type 2 Diabetes (the ACCT2 Study): Protocol for a Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial

2025· article· en· W4409415099 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Natasja Bjerre, Christina Hoeiberg, Cecilie Ottosson, Mie Klarskov Jensen, Nanna Marie Kildsig, Trine Kjeldgaard Møller, Anne‐Ditte Termannsen, Bettina Ewers, Britt Hollender-Schou, Rebecca Grue, Ulla Bjerre‐Christensen, Solveig Jansen, Kamran Akram

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrduRandomized controlled trialTurkishProtocol (science)PreprintArabicPsychologyMedicineMedical educationAlternative medicineComputer scienceWorld Wide WebLinguisticsSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Individuals with non-Western backgrounds consistently exhibit a higher risk of type 2 diabetes (T2D) than ethnic Danes. Factors such as health behaviors, limited health care access, and social determinants of health often contribute to this disparity. Culturally sensitive interventions are crucial; however, effective interventions for managing T2D in non-Western populations remain limited. Objective This study aims to examine the effect of a 1-year person-centered and culturally sensitive intervention on improving glycemic control (hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c]) in Arabic-, Turkish-, or Urdu-speaking individuals with T2D. The secondary objectives are to improve diabetes management and overall well-being. Methods This study is designed as a 2-arm randomized controlled trial. A total of 96 women and men with T2D (HbA1c≥53 mmol/mol) speaking either Arabic, Turkish, or Urdu as their native language will be randomized for 1 year to a health care professional–assisted intervention group (person-centered and culturally sensitive course of treatment) or a control group (usual care) in a 1:1 ratio in Denmark. Assessments are scheduled at baseline and 1 year. The primary outcome is HbA1c, while lipids, blood pressure, and patient-reported outcomes, including well-being, diabetes management, health literacy, and use of and adherence to diabetes medication, are secondary outcomes. Feasibility and satisfaction are evaluated through interviews. The study is approved by the Ethics Committee of the Capital Region of Denmark (H-23042245). Results A 5.0-mmol/mol change in HbA1c is the minimally important difference, requiring 88 participants. To allow for uncertainties and dropouts, the total was increased to 96. As of January 2025, a total of 88 participants have been recruited. Recruitment was completed in March 2025. Data collection will continue until December 2025, with the first results expected by March 2026. Conclusions This study will contribute to the limited knowledge regarding the effects of person-centered and culturally sensitive treatment approaches for T2D in Arabic-, Turkish-, or Urdu-speaking individuals. The study uses a robust methodological design and will present an alternative avenue for managing T2D and improving overall well-being. The study offers valuable insights into the experiences of participants and health care professionals, including potential obstacles and strategies for implementation in outpatient clinics. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06147245; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06147245 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) DERR1-10.2196/67319

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.151

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.007
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0070.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0400.006

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.403 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicDiabetes Management and Education→French-language works237,207→