MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6959857427 · doi:10.11575/prism/47788

Exploring Barriers to, and Facilitators of, Diabetes Self-Management Among Patients with Kidney Failure Receiving Dialysis

2024· other· en· W6959857427 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicWheat and Barley Genetics and Pathology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiabetes mellitusDialysisThematic analysisQualitative researchKidney diseaseHealth careQuality of life (healthcare)MEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diabetes mellitus is the leading cause of kidney failure in Canada and around the globe. The treatment of kidney failure may require dialysis - a life-sustaining therapy. Dialysis therapy places significant demands on patients, adding an extra health burden for those navigating the transition to living with chronic diseases. It is well reported in literature that dialysis patients with diabetes compared to those without diabetes have poorer quality of life, longer lengths of hospital stay, a higher burden of morbidity and mortality, and significantly higher economic costs. However, literature on barriers to, and facilitators of, optimal self-management of diabetes are scant in patients with kidney failure. The aim of this thesis work was to understand, describe and interpret the perspectives of patients on barriers to, and facilitators of, diabetes self-management. A narrative review and interpretive descriptive qualitative study were undertaken to address the study aim. Semi-structured interviews with fourteen patients were conducted. A total of 134 articles were identified whereas eight articles met our inclusion criteria. A review of the articles and qualitative study revealed barriers to and facilitators of diabetes self-management. Emerging themes from the included studies and semi-structured interviews were identified using inductive thematic analysis. Barriers reported by participants were financial and physical limitations, limited access to healthcare services, siloed and fragmented care, increased medical complexity, and the higher burden of health. Facilitators of diabetes self-management were self-management support and education, coordinated care between healthcare providers, and supportive environments. Findings from this thesis work contribute to a broader scientific literature, facilitate further research in this domain to address barriers, and guide resource allocation concerning the improvement of diabetes care and self-management practices among patients with kidney failure on dialysis therapies.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MIND→Same topicWheat and Barley Genetics and Pathology→French-language works237,207→