MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Avaliação de famílias de crianças com doença falciforme

2018· article· pt· W2901859909 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Patrícia Peres de Oliveira, Elaine Cristina Rodrigues Gesteira, Alzilid Cíntia Rodarte, Mariana Aparecida Costa, Júlia Lamese Amaral, Walquíria Jesusmara dos Santos

Bibliographic record

VenueRepositorio Institucional (Pontificia Universidad Javeriana) · 2018
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMaternal and Neonatal Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesMedicinePsychologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To evaluate the structure, development and family functionality living with sickle cell disease. Method: This is qualitative study that used as the theoretical framework Calgary Model of family assessment and as methodological strategy the case study. Data were collected from six families of children with sickle cell disease, attended by a Hemonúcleo of Hematology Center Foundation and Hemotherapy Minas Gerais (Hemominas), located in Minas Gerais, Brazil, from September/2014 to February/2015, through pre-designed instrument, beyond semistructured interviews and participant observation, with register in daily of field. Examined by means of thematic analysis e, the categories theoretical framework adopted agreed. Results: It was verified that four families composed a nuclear model; the others two families were of the extended type. Conflicting subsystems been present in only family and all had presented in its net of support deriving elements of neighbors and members of the extensive family. In the assistance process, it was evidenced that the six families presented insufficient support of the health services and, for the solution of problems, the families evaluated showed empowerment in the face of the time of discovery due to their previous experiences. Conclusion: This study the child with sickle cell disease and its family can be used for the nurses in accordance with to subsidize the planning of the work in the care, making possible the elaboration of personalized interventions the functioning of the familiar dynamics.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.132

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.306 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRepositorio Institucional (Pontificia Universidad Javeriana)Same topicMaternal and Neonatal HealthcareFrench-language works237,207