Examining the Effect of a Novel Stress Reduction Intervention on the Control of Prediabetes: A Feasibility Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BackgroundPrediabetes is a major risk factor for type 2 diabetes (T2D) and cardiovascular disease. Although prediabetes is associated with chronic stress-related behavioral and physiological maladaptation, few studies have focused on chronic psychological stress.PurposeThis study aimed to examine the feasibility and preliminary outcomes of Emotional Awareness and Expression Treatment (EAET) adopted and implemented among adults with high risk for prediabetes.MethodThis study used a prospective, within-subjects, repeated measures, uncontrolled design with a 4-week virtual intervention period and three measurement points for all participants: baseline, 3 months from baseline, and 6 months from baseline. Forty individuals were screened for prediabetes, and sixteen were eligible to participate. Divided into three groups, participants received four weekly virtual sessions of EAET. Glycated hemoglobin (A1C) and insulin secretion (C-peptide) were measured at baseline, 3- and 6-month periods in addition to self-reported eating habits, physical activity, and perceived stress.ResultsTwelve participants completed all sessions and were fully engaged in the intervention sessions. Across the study period, participants' perceived stress and unhealthy eating habits decreased significantly. Glycated hemoglobin (A1C) showed a non-significant drop at 6 months, but the average C-peptide concentration, exercise frequency, and exercise duration increased significantly.ConclusionsThe EAET stress reduction intervention is feasible and showed promising results in reducing stress and decreasing risk factors for T2D. EAET can be further developed to reduce the incidence and prevalence of T2D, which could lead to a significant decrease in the direct and indirect health and cost burdens of T2D.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".