MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Avaliação do Controle Postural e do Tipo do Pé de Pessoas com Deficiência Visual

2020· article· pt· W1620827164 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueREVISTA DA ASSOCIAÇÃO BRASILEIRA DE ATIVIDADE MOTORA ADAPTADA · 2020
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAcademic Research in Diverse Fields
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Particle Physics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesMedicinePsychologyPhysicsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A alteração do equilíbrio em deficientes visuais é alvo de investigações, uma vez que equilíbrio e visão estão inter-relacionados. Além disso, outro importante fator na manutenção do controle postural é o aspecto biomecânico dos pés. Este estudo teve como objetivo avaliar o controle postural e o tipo dos pés de pessoas com deficiência visual. Para tanto, participaram do estudo 17 adultos com deficiênciavisual que foram avaliados por meio do sistema de baropodometria. Os dados referentes à oscilação do centro de pressão foram analisados por meio do software Conformat Research 5.8, e submetidos ao teste estatístico de Mann-Whitney. Os resultados mostraram que não houve diferença estatisticamente significante no controle postural ao comparar indivíduos com resíduo e sem resíduo visual e que apresentavam pé normal e pé com alterações biomecânicas, o que demonstra que o déficit visual foi o principal fator das alterações no controle postural para os participantes desse estudo.

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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.325
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.285 · 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