MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141534896 · doi:10.5020/2620

Acesso à saúde bucal pública pelo paciente especial: a ótica do cirurgião-dentista

2014· article· en· W2141534896 on OpenAlexaff
Herenia P. Lawrence, Luiza de Paula Sousa, Fabíola de Lima Gonçalves, Maria Vieira de Lima Saintrain, Anya Pimentel Gomes Fernandes Vieira

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Brasileira em Promoção da saúde · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Anxiety and Anesthesia Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFamily medicineOral healthCross-sectional studyOral hygieneHealth carePublic healthNursingDentistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objetivo: Conhecer, sob a ótica dos cirurgiões-dentistas, o acesso dos pacientes especiais à saúde bucal no Sistema Único de Saúde. Métodos: Estudo transversal, quantitativo, realizado em 2011 por meio da aplicação de entrevistas baseadas em questionários semiestruturados, realizadas com cirurgiões-dentistas nas Unidades Básicas de Saúde da Família (UBASF) de uma capital do nordeste brasileiro. As variáveis englobaram dados sociodemográficos, condições de trabalho e as relacionadas ao acesso e atendimento do paciente portador de necessidade especial. Os achados foram analisados com estatística adequada pelo SPSS 15. Resultados: Entrevistaram-se 44 cirurgiões-dentistas, dos quais 36 (81,8%) atendiam pacientes especiais, 29 (65,9%) realizavam exame clínico e orientação de higiene bucal, e 5 (11,3%) realizavam exame clínico e encaminhavam para especialistas. Nove (20,5%) tiveram disciplina direcionada para esse tipo de usuário. O acesso, o acolhimento e a assistência odontológica oferecidos foram aprovados por 31 cirurgiões-dentistas (70%). Conclusão: Sob a ótica dos cirurgiões-dentista investigados, os pacientes especiais da rede pública estão tendo acesso à atenção em saúde bucal, entretanto, a resolutividade parece estar prejudicada, sendo necessário encaminhá-los a outros serviços. doi:10.5020/18061230.2014.p190

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient 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 score0.691
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Brasileira em Promoção da saúdeSame topicDental Anxiety and Anesthesia TechniquesFrench-language works237,207