Role of food choices in dietary behaviour of patients with type 2 diabetes
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dietary management is a well-established component of diabetes treatment.Dietary advice is important for patients with type 2 diabetes to help manage the disease and to minimize the risk of complications.However, diet compliance has been described as the most difficult aspect of the diabetic regimen.One of the major reasons for non- compliance is that the beliefs and perceptions associated with food influence the patient's interpretation of dietary advice and diet management recommendations.This study investigated the following questions:1. What are the specific reasons that patients with type2 diabetes give for making their food choices? 2. Are food beliefs associated with the food choices of patients with type2 diabetes?3. Is the data from the Food Choice Map @CM) similar to the data from the Food Frequency Questionnaire @FQ) in terms of food items, frequencies, and patterns?Data was collected from 40 follow-up patients with type 2 diabetes attending the education programs of the Diabetes Education Centre (DEC) at Health Sciences Centre, Winnipeg, Manitoba.Each patient completed a demographic questionnaire, a 45-minute in-depth interview (FClv, and a food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) During the interview, each patient created a visual map of their food consumption during a typical day and discussed the reasons for these food choices.Content analysis was used to identify 35 constructs from the 40 patient interviews.Of all 35 construct variables, 20 showed statistically significant associations.The 3 construct variables that showed the strongest relationships with food consumption were diabetes knowledge positive (R2: o.7lgg47, df : 1, p < 0.001), preferences (R2: 0.611499, df : 1, p < 0.001), and physiology positive (K-2: 0.60124, df : l, p < 0.001).
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it