Dolor osteomuscular y apoyo social en una muestra de gerontes de Bucaramanga
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objetivo. Determinar la relación entre las características clínicas del dolor osteomuscular y el apoyo social. Método. Se utilizó un método no experimental, con enfoque cuantitativo, de corte transversal y alcance correlacional, en una muestra de 70 adultos mayores de ambos sexos, partícipes de grupos de autoayuda de la ciudad de Bucaramanga, a quienes se les aplicó la versión abreviada del cuestionario del dolor de McGill y el cuestionario de apoyo social. Resultados. Se encontró que el 59% de los participantes describe su dolor como incómodo y el 57% como interno; en tanto, el 33% percibe apoyo emocional y el 39%, apoyo práctico, ambos de manera moderada. No se encontró correlación entre el apoyo emocional general y el índice de intensidad de dolor. Conclusión. Se encuentra que no existe correlación significativa entre las variable, sin embargo, es preciso tener en cuenta que este tipo de estudios ayudará a consolidar la comprensión de la percepción del dolor y las variables que deberían tener en cuenta para su apropiado manejo clínico.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".