Evaluating the feasibility of a co-designed technology-enabled, collaborative care program for young adults with type 1 diabetes and diabetes distress: A protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is a complex, chronic condition that requires active and intensive daily self-management, often necessitating specialized and integrated care. Individuals with T1D are at a heightened risk of experiencing diabetes distress (DD) and other mental health challenges, which, when unaddressed, can impair diabetes self-management and diminish quality of life. These challenges are particularly pronounced for young adults with T1D, who must navigate the typical developmental transitions of early adulthood while managing changes in their diabetes care, self-management, and support systems. However, physical and mental healthcare remain fragmented. While previous studies have explored interventions to address DD, many have faced limitations in scalability. This study aims to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of the co-designed technology-enabled collaborative care model (TECC-T1D3) tailored to young adults with T1D and DD. Methods: A randomized controlled trial in young adults aged 18-29 years living with T1D in Ontario, Canada (n = 60), to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the co-designed TECC-T1D3 intervention. Secondary objectives include evaluating the preliminary effectiveness of the program in reducing DD, enhancing self-efficacy, improving quality of life, and exploring the impact of the intervention on connectedness to care and community. Results: This paper presents the trial protocol of the TECC-T1D3 study. Recruitment began in December 2024, and the trial was registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT06804694). Conclusion: The TECC-T1D3 study will determine whether a TECC model is feasible and acceptable for young adults with T1D and DD.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".