Anestesia local odontológica y embarazo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
espanolLa conservacion del bienestar del binomio madre-feto, durante el periodo reproductivo, es el objetivo primordial del equipo de salud perinatal. Tradicionalmente, los Odontologos han ofrecido las opciones conservadoras del tratamiento a las mujeres embarazadas. Actualmente, esto ha cambiado, pudiendose administrar, de ser necesario, farmacos que permitan la anestesia local, atribuyendose pocos efectos colaterales y manteniendose cuidados especiales durante los procedimientos. Sin embargo, la mayoria de los Obstetras y Odontologos prefieren que el tratamiento dental se realice durante el segundo trimestre, manteniendose al minimo durante los otros periodos de la gestacion. EnglishThe conservation of the welfare of the unit mothers-fetus, during the period pregnancy, is the fundamental objective of the equipment of the health perinatal. Traditionally, the dentist has offered the conservative options of the processing to women pregnancy. At present, this no longer is thus; being been able to administer, of being necessary, drugs that they permit the local anesthesia, being attributed few effects collaterals and maintaining specials cares during the procedures. However, the majority of the Obstetricians and Dentist prefer that the dental processing be practiced during the second quarter, being maintained to the most minimum one said procedures during the other periods of gestation.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 0.005 |
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".