MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4411369304 · doi:10.2196/69301

Promoting Intergenerational Health in Rural Kentuckians With Diabetes (PIHRK’D): Protocol for a Longitudinal Cohort Study

2025· article· en· W4411369304 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Brittany L. Smalls, Courtney L. Ortz, Makenzie L. Barr, Heather Norman‐Burgdolf, Christopher J. McLouth, Brittany Harlow, Oluwatosin Leshi

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
KeywordsMedicineGlycated hemoglobinGerontologyOverweightPsychological interventionObesityCohortEnvironmental healthDiabetes mellitusType 2 diabetesNursingInternal medicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background The prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is steadily increasing and has exceeded 20% in some rural Kentucky counties. In Kentucky, chronic diet-sensitive conditions and unhealthy behaviors are among the highest in the nation, with approximately 36.5% of adults with obesity and 13.3% diagnosed with T2DM, while only 15.3% meet physical activity recommendations, and 4.7% meet fruit and vegetable consumption recommendations. Family-based interventions can be used to promote health in rural communities that often comprise intergenerational households. Objective The purpose of the study is to determine whether leveraging family units as sources of social support promotes nutritional and physical activity changes among those who are overweight or have obesity and are diagnosed with T2DM. Methods This study consists of 3 phases (baseline, intervention, and postintervention). An overview of the study will be provided to interested participants, after which their consent will be sought. At baseline, demographic data, social support, physical activity, diabetes knowledge, diabetes self-management, dietary recall, obstructive sleep apnea, and sleep health, as well as social network data, will be collected using validated questionnaires. Anthropometric (weight, height, lean mass, and body fat) and T2DM-related (blood pressure, glycated hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c], total cholesterol, low-density lipoproteins, high-density lipoproteins, and triglycerides) clinical measures will also be obtained. During the intervention phase, participants will complete 6 months of medical nutrition therapy (MNT) alongside 1 member of their social network (eg, household member). In addition, participants will have the option to attend Dining with Diabetes program sessions that are offered at the county level through Cooperative Extension Service (Extension) agents. Follow-up data collection will include clinical measures, a dietary recall, and the assessment of participants’ stage of behavior change at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months postintervention. Results This study was funded in November 2022 by the American Diabetes Association (ADA). Data collection started on September 1, 2023, and is projected to end in November 2025. We have enrolled a total of 48 participants in the study. Conclusions T2DM is a growing problem, particularly among vulnerable populations in rural Kentucky. This study plans to leverage family units as sources of social support with MNT and nutrition education through the Dining with Diabetes program. If effective, this approach will inform future family-based interventions in rural communities. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06080425; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06080425 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) DERR1-10.2196/69301

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.172

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0510.011

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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.559
Teacher spread0.404 · 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 designObservational
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 topicCardiovascular Health and Risk Factors→French-language works237,207→