Bibliographic record
Abstract
O artigo faz parte da minha tese de Mestrado em Servico Social que tem por titulo ''A Ilusao do Direito a e por tematica a politica de saude nacional, analisada a partir das reclamacoes dos utentes dos Centros de Saude da Sub-regiao de Saude de Setubal, isto e, existentes no Gabinete do Utente que e um Servico de reclamacoes. No ponto de vista do utente, o Gabinete do Utente e um servico que contribui para a legitimacao dos seus direitos de cidadania na saude ou, pelo contrario, e um servico controlador e hegemonico da instituicao e dos proprios profissionais que a servem? Como forma de participacao na saude, qual e a funcao util da reclamacao/queixa? Que legitimidade e visibilidade tem? Que capacidade de decisao tem lido os queixosos na proteccao da sua saude, na participacao e controlo dos seus servicos? Sera a reclamacao um meio pelo qual se exerce o direito que os individuos e a comunidade tem de participar na definicao do politico de saude e no controlo do funcionamento dos servicos? E uma forma de mediacao na modernidade (Estado /Sociedade /poder / dominacao)? Como se_ estabelece a relacao comando- obediencia? Ha um espaco de participacao no sentido da satisfacao das necessidades da populacao envolvida, ou nao?
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 | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.003 |
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.
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".