A INCIDÊNCIA DA DOR NO OMBRO EM PACIENTES HEMIPLÉGICOS PÓS ACIDENTE VASCULAR CEREBRAL - AVC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introducao: O AVC pode ser definido como deficit neurologico focal subito, sendo a terceira causa de obito em paises desenvolvidos e a primeira no Brasil. Uma das complicacoes que limitam a funcionalidade devido a presenca de dor e o ombro doloroso, decorrente do acometimento de estruturas estaticas e dinâmicas do ombro, como ligamentos, capsulas e musculos. Objetivos: Verificar a incidencia de dor no ombro em pacientes hemiplegicos pos AVC em uma clinica de reabilitacao de Goiânia - ADFEGO. Metodos: A amostra foi constituida de 22 pacientes, com idade entre 38 e 77 anos e de ambos os sexos. Para verificar a presenca de dor foi utilizado questionario simples de funcionalidade do membro superior, questionario de dor de McGill e goniometria. Resultados: Dos 22 pacientes analisados 72% apresentaram dor no ombro pos AVC, sendo 9 no ombro direito e 7 no ombro esquerdo. Conclusao: Neste estudo a incidencia de dor no ombro em pacientes hemiplegicos pos AVC foi alta sendo considerada incapacitante, iniciando apos 1o mes de AVC e estendendo por longo prazo. Portanto e importante caracterizar e quantificar a dor e a limitacao funcional do ombro, visando melhor orientar o paciente para que essa dor nao afete o posicionamento confortavel do individuo e o prejudique nas atividades de vida diarias (AVD’s).
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".