Autonomia e cogestão na prática em saúde mental: o dispositivo da gestão autônoma da medicação (GAM)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
O artigo aborda a articulacao entre autonomia e cogestao nas praticas em saude mental no Brasil, baseado em estudo multicentrico. Tal estudo objetivou a elaboracao do Guia Brasileiro da Gestao Autonoma da Medicacao (Guia GAM-BR), com base na traducao e adaptacao do Guia GAM desenvolvido no Quebec – instrumento dirigido a pessoas com transtornos mentais graves. Uma primeira versao do Guia GAM traduzida e adaptada ao contexto brasileiro foi utilizada em Grupos de Intervencao (GI) com usuarios de servicos de saude mental nos campos da pesquisa. A construcao da versao final do Guia GAM brasileiro incluiu as modificacoes propostas pelos GI em cada campo, debatidas em reunioes multicentricas com a participacao de pesquisadores, trabalhadores e usuarios integrantes dos GI. No curso da pesquisa, a estrategia GAM assumiu o desafio de propor-se como pratica cogestiva, compatibilizando exercicio da autonomia, direito e protagonismo dos usuarios com o funcionamento e cultura organizacional das instituicoes de saude mental.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".