MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050567027 · doi:10.5380/ce.v16i3.24293

A EXPERTISE DE NIGHTINGALE E O MANUAL BRASILEIRO DE ACREDITAÇÃO DE ORGANIZAÇÕES DE SAÚDE

2011· article· pt· W2050567027 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

VenueCogitare Enfermagem · 2011
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, Nursing, Elderly Care
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
FundersUniversidade Federal do Paraná
KeywordsPsychologyHumanitiesQuality (philosophy)PhilosophyMedicineEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reflexão sobre a expertise e a contribuição de Florence Nightingale para a prática da enfermagem e para a segurança do paciente. São realizadas analogias entre concepções da referida autora acerca de doentes, enfermagem, ambiente hospitalar e os itens de orientação do Manual Brasileiro de Acreditação de Organizações Prestadoras de Serviços de Saúde, versão 2006, especificamente os relativos ao Nível 1. A abordagem epidemiológica, a compreensão e ênfase da necessidade de conhecimento científico de Nightingale são atuais e refletem a importância, por ela atribuída, à prevenção de riscos, medidas e avaliação de fenômenos em busca da qualidade da assistência e à segurança do paciente, preceitos incluídos no Manual Brasileiro de Acreditação, que destaca a segurança, a qualidade da assistência, o aprimoramento da gestão e a qualificação das equipes.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch 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 score0.419
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.265 · 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