MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Responsabilidade civil do cirurgião-dentista: a importância do assistente técnico

2009· article· pt· W1966035275 on OpenAlex
Ricardo Henrique Alves da Silva, Jamilly de Oliveira Musse, Rodolfo Francisco Haltenhoff Melani, Rogério Nogueira de Oliveira

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 Dental Press de Ortodontia e Ortopedia Facial · 2009
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMedical Malpractice and Liability Issues
Canadian institutionsNortel (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUÇÃO: a responsabilidade do cirurgião-dentista pode ser entendida como obrigações de ordem penal, civil, ética e administrativa, às quais está sujeito no exercício de sua atividade. Assim, se comprovado um resultado lesivo ao paciente - por imprudência, imperícia ou negligência -, o cirurgião-dentista estará sujeito às penalidades previstas no Código Civil, sendo obrigado a satisfazer o dano e indenizar segundo a consequência provocada. Em processos cíveis, as partes poderão contratar um assistente técnico para fornecer, aos respectivos advogados, conhecimentos técnicos e científicos inerentes ao tema. OBJETIVO: informar sobre a importância da atuação de assistentes técnicos em processos cíveis, propiciando às partes uma maior compreensão dos aspectos técnicos, éticos e legais. CONCLUSÃO: há a necessidade de um maior conhecimento, por parte dos profissionais em Odontologia, sobre os aspectos éticos e legais que norteiam a profissão.

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)0.007
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 score0.401
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.338 · 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