Mensuração e características da dor perineal em primíparas submetidas à episiotomia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJETIVO: Mensurar e caracterizar a percepção dolorosa das puérperas primíparas submetidas à episiotomia. MÉTODOS: Trata-se de uma pesquisa descritiva com abordagem quantitativa, realizada com 40 puérperas primíparas submetidas ao parto normal com episiotomia. Para mensuração da dor foi utilizada a escala de categoria numérica e para caracterização a versão brasileira do questionário McGill - Br-MPQ. RESULTADOS: Os valores encontrados na avaliação da dor foram de média 4,2 e os descritores que melhor caracterizaram a dor foram: dolorida; que repuxa; incômoda; chata; ardida; pica como uma agulhada; latejante; em pressão. CONCLUSÃO: A intensidade da dor perineal foi considerada como moderada pelas puérperas. Na caracterização da queixa dolorosa os descritores mais citados foram da dimensão sensorial. Este estudo possibilitou observar a necessidade do reconhecimento dos aspectos qualitativos e quantitativos da dor na prática clinica obstétrica.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".