Tratamento paliativo do adenocarcinoma gástrico
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUÇÃO: Embora decrescendo nos países do chamado primeiro mundo, o adenocarcinoma gástrico mantém-se como terceiro tumor mais frequente no sexo masculino mundialmente. Sua mortalidade é muito elevada, fruto do diagnóstico tardio em lesões muito avançadas, o que frequentemente torna paliativo seu tratamento, motivos pelos quais se justificam estudos no sentido de melhorar estes resultados. MÉTODO: Revisão da literatura através do portal de periódicos da CAPES indicados por busca no sites da Bireme e PubMed. Além disso, foram consultados os sumários do 8º Congresso Internacional de Câncer Gástrico em 2009. Foi apresentada uma sugestão de algoritmo de atendimento destes pacientes. CONCLUSÕES: O surgimento de novas drogas anticancer, mais efetivas, está propiciando novas alternativas para a ressecção gástrica como tratamento paliativo. Novos protocolos estão surgindo mostrando boas perspectivas para melhorar os resultados desta doença.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".