MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1503607323

Autonomia e cogestão na prática em saúde mental: o dispositivo da gestão autônoma da medicação (GAM)

2013· article· pt· W1503607323 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eduardo Passos, Analice de Lima Palombini, Rosana Teresa Onocko Campos, Sandro Rodrigues, Jorge Melo, Paula Milward Maggi, Cecília de Castro e Marques, Lívia Zanchet, Michele da Rocha Cervo, Bruno Ferrari Emerich

Bibliographic record

VenueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) · 2013
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, Nursing, Elderly Care
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceMental healthPsychologyPhilosophyPsychiatry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

O artigo aborda a articulação entre autonomia e cogestão nas práticas em saúde mental no Brasil, baseado em estudo multicêntrico. Tal estudo objetivou a elaboração do Guia Brasileiro da Gestão Autônoma da Medicação (Guia GAM-BR), com base na tradução e adaptação do Guia GAM desenvolvido no Quebec – instrumento dirigido a pessoas com transtornos mentais graves. Uma primeira versão do Guia GAM traduzida e adaptada ao contexto brasileiro foi utilizada em Grupos de Intervenção (GI) com usuários de serviços de saúde mental nos campos da pesquisa. A construção da versão final do Guia GAM brasileiro incluiu as modificações propostas pelos GI em cada campo, debatidas em reuniões multicêntricas com a participação de pesquisadores, trabalhadores e usuários integrantes dos GI. No curso da pesquisa, a estratégia GAM assumiu o desafio de propor-se como prática cogestiva, compatibilizando exercício da autonomia, direito e protagonismo dos usuários com o funcionamento e cultura organizacional das instituições de saúde 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.815
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.276 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations15
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas)Same topicHealth, Nursing, Elderly CareFrench-language works237,207