Efeitos da hidrocinesioterapia no tratamento da Síndrome Dolorosa Miofascial: um estudo de caso
Bibliographic record
Abstract
O referido estudo teve como objetivo geral avaliar os efeitos da hidrocinesioterapia, atraves de um protocolo de atendimento elaborado com base na fundamentacao teorica disponivel, no tratamento da Sindrome Dolorosa Miofascial. Tal protocolo constou de um programa de exercicios terapeuticos de aquecimento, relaxamento, fortalecimento e alongamento muscular realizados em agua aquecida. A pesquisa, que caracteriza-se como estudo de caso, teve como amostra dois sujeitos, ambos funcionarios do Hospital Universitario de Santa Maria/ RS, com idades de 43 e 51 anos. O protocolo de tratamento teve a duracao de nove semanas, com uma frequencia de tres vezes por semana e com duracao media de 50 minutos cada sessao. A coleta de dados constou de avaliacao cinetico-funcional, atraves da palpacao de pontos-gatilho e verificacao da intensidade e caracteristicas da dor, segundo Escala Visual Numerica de Dor (EVND) e Questionario McGill, respectivamente. Os testes de avaliacao foram realizados antes e apos o periodo de aplicacao do protocolo terapeutico. O resultado deste estudo demonstrou ausencia ou diminuicao da dor nas regioes escapular, cervical e membros superiores. Tambem, constataram-se significativa reducao do numero de Pgs, em ambos os individuos. O estudo permitiu concluir que a utilizacao da hidrocinesioterapia empregada no tratamento dessa patologia, pode ser efetiva, conforme os resultados obtidos.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".