Efeito do excesso de peso na mortalidade geral após os 65 anos: revisão baseada na evidência
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ResumoIntrodução: O excesso de peso é considerado um fator de risco de mortalidade geral e cardiovascular.A prevalência do excesso de peso nos indivíduos idosos tem vindo a aumentar.Contudo, alguns autores sugerem que nesta população, o excesso de peso pode não estar associado a um maior risco de mortalidade.Objetivo: Rever a evidência existente sobre o risco de mortalidade geral associado ao excesso de peso, comparado com o peso normal, em indivíduos com idade igual ou superior a 65 anos.Métodos: Pesquisa bibliográfica de artigos publicados de 1 de abril de 2005 até 31 de março de 2015, nas bases de dados Medline, sítios de medicina baseada na evidência (National Guideline Clearinghouse, Guideline Finder, Canadian Medical Association, The Cochrane Database, DARE e Bandolier) e referências bibliográficas dos artigos selecionados, utilizando a combinação de termos MeSH: Aged, Body Mass Index e Mortality.Para atribuição dos níveis de evidência e forças de recomendação (FR), usou-se a escala Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy da American Family Physician.
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 | 0.007 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".