MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Percepção de mulheres relacionada aos métodos não farmacológicos para alívio da dor no trabalho de parto

2017· article· pt· W2604754707 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Recien · 2017
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Particle Physics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeelingNursingPsychologyMedicineHumanitiesSocial psychologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Este artigo tem como objetivo descrever, a partir da literatura, a concepção das mulheres referentes a utilização dos Métodos Não Farmacológicos para alivio da dor no trabalho de parto. Trata-se de uma revisão integrativa da literatura realizada a partir da Biblioteca Virtual em Saúde, utilizando as bases de dados, LILACS e BDENF, sendo selecionados 13 artigos para a análise dos dados. De acordo com os resultados, as mulheres relataram que a maioria das medidas não farmacológicas não reduziu significativamente a dor, porém permitiu que trouxesse uma redução dos sentimentos de medo e ansiedade gerados pelo momento. Os estudos mostraram ainda que os profissionais que estiveram envolvidos na assistência humanizada foram lembrados de maneira positiva pelas mulheres. No entanto, acredita-se que ainda há necessidade de investimentos com vistas a atender as exigências das práticas humanizadas de parto, uma vez que muitos hospitais-maternidades ainda não dispõem destas medidas na assistência.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.574
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.094
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.322 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it