El impacto de los trastornos de la conducta alimentaria en los cuidadores informales: Una revisión de la literatura
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé L’objectif de cet article est de présenter un panorama des résultats des recherches, essentiellement qualitatives et anglophones, qui se sont penchées sur la question de l’impact du trouble du comportement alimentaire - TCA - sur les proches (non professional caregivers en langue anglaise). Les recherches recensées décrivent l’impact au quotidien du TCA sur la vie des proches : confrontation permanente aux symptômes, détérioration des relations avec le patient et stigmatisation. Elles rapportent aussi les impacts émotionnels et la détresse psychologique éprouvée par les proches, ainsi que les besoins générés par l’émergence des troubles : essentiellement besoins en information, en guidance et en soutien social et émotionnel. Elles soulignent l’importance de prendre en compte le vécu des proches dans le traitement du TCA et ouvrent des pistes nouvelles pour leur implication dans les protocoles de traitement.
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 | 0.013 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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".