“What Can I Eat?” Healthy Choices for American Indian and Alaska Native Adults With Type 2 Diabetes: Outcomes From a Randomized Waitlist-Controlled Trial of a Diabetes Nutrition Education Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the "What Can I Eat?": Healthy Choices for American Indian and Alaska Native Adults With Type 2 Diabetes (AI/AN WCIE) intervention. DESIGN: Pilot randomized waitlist-controlled trial. Recruitment through diabetes registries and randomized to either the immediate intervention (n = 35) or waitlist control group (n = 25). Immediate arm started classes immediately on randomization; waitlist arm started classes 3 months after randomization. SETTING: Classes were taught synchronously online by registered dietitian nutritionists at 5 reservation-based or urban intertribal clinical sites nationwide in 2021. PARTICIPANTS: American Indian and Alaska Native adults with type 2 diabetes (n = 60). INTERVENTION: Topics in AI/AN WCIE classes include: the Diabetes Plate, sugar-sweetened beverages, decreasing sodium, increasing consumption of healthful traditional Native foods. Class activities included didactic sessions, hands-on interactive learning, physical activity, mindful eating, and goal setting. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Diabetes nutrition self-efficacy, behavior, and clinical measures. ANALYSIS: Linear mixed models examined change in outcomes from baseline to 1 month and 3 months by randomization group. By 3 months, immediate intervention participants had completed the classes; the waitlist control group had not yet begun the intervention. RESULTS: After 3 months, confidence in using the Diabetes Plate (β = 0.80 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.56-1.03], P < 0.001) and healthy nutrition behavior (β = 0.88 [95% CI, 0.57-1.19], P = 0.004) improved significantly in the immediate intervention group but not in the waitlist control group; confidence in making healthy nutrition choices (β = 0.65 [95% CI, 0.43-0.88], P = 0.02) improved significantly more in the immediate intervention group than in the waitlist control group. No significant changes were identified in clinical outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The AI/AN WCIE program enhanced self-efficacy and healthful nutrition choices among adults with type 2 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".