INSTRUMENTOS PARA AVALIAÇÃO E INTERVENÇÃO NA FAMÍLIA: um estudo descritivo / INSTRUMENTS FOR FAMILY ASSESSMENT AND INTERVENTION: a descriptive study
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
Introdução. Avaliação e a intervenção familiar são importantes processos para o planejamento do cuidado em saúde. Esta constatação norteou o seguinte questionamento: Que instrumentos estão disponíveis para avaliação e intervenção na família? Objetivos. Realizar levantamento bibliográfico de instrumentos para avaliação e intervenção na família; contextualizar pressupostos e utilização dos mesmos. Métodos. Pesquisa bibliográfica de natureza descritiva. A busca foi limitada aos textos disponíveis no Banco de Teses e Dissertações da CAPES e do Lilacs da BVS. Foram encontrados 159 estudos. Resultados. A medicina privilegiou aspectos de avaliação e a enfermagem dirigiu os estudos para intervenção familiar. O APGAR e o Modelo Calgary foram os instrumentos mais utilizados. Conclusões. Cabe aos profissionais um olhar para além dos instrumentos de avaliação e intervenção familiar aqui relacionados e mencionados e considerar a família como sistema dinâmico e complexo que exige daqueles que nela atuam formas dinâmicas de avaliação e intervenção.Palavras-chave: Prática familiar. Enfermagem familiar. Relações familiares.AbstractIntroduction. The Family assessment and intervention are important approaches for the health care management. This statement lead us to the following question: What instruments are available for family assessment and intervention? Objective. To do a literature survey on family assessment and intervention instruments and contextualize their presuppositions and utilization. Methods. Bibliographical review of descriptive approach. The search was limited to articles available in the CAPES database of thesis and dissertation and Lilacs database of BVS. 159 studies were found. Results. Aspects of evaluation were the most important for the medicine and familiar intervention was more conducted by the nursing. The APGAR and the Calgary model were the most used instruments. Conclusion. The health professionals should look beyond the familiar assessment and evaluation instruments listed here, and to consider family as a dynamic and complex system which demands from those who take part of it, a dynamic way of assessment and intervention.Keywords: Family practice. Family nursing. Family relationships.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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