Metodologias qualitativas em pesquisa na saúde: referencial interpretativo de Patricia Benner
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RESUMO Objetivo: este artigo relata a experiência de utilização do referencial fenomenológico interpretativo de Patricia Benner em uma pesquisa de dissertação de mestrado. A fenomenologia interpretativa, pautada em referenciais filosóficos existenciais e de interpretação, possui como objetivo compreender as experiências humanas nos diversos mundos dos participantes da pesquisa. Os dados foram coletados por meio de entrevistas com nove enfermeiros, nos meses de novembro e dezembro de 2014. Resultados: o processo de análise dos dados, de acordo com o referencial de Benner, segue os passos: transcrição, codificação, análise temática e busca por casos paradigmáticos e exemplares. Para tanto, os conhecimentos prévios dos pesquisadores fazem parte da estrutura do projeto interpretativo, constituindo as vias de condução do estudo. Conclusão: o uso desse referencial teórico e metodológico constituiu-se em um desafio para a pesquisadora, porém demonstrou potencial ímpar para o desvelamento de fenômenos existenciais relacionados ao cotidiano dos participantes.
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 | 0.035 | 0.058 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".