Representations on adherence to the treatment of Multidrug-Resistant Tuberculosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify representations regarding adherence to the treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis from the perspective of patients who were discharged upon being cured. METHOD: A qualitative study with patients who completed the drug treatment for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis in São Paulo. Social Determination was used to interpret the health-disease process, and the testimonies were analyzed according to dialectical hermeneutics and the discourse analysis technique. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients were interviewed. The majority (80.9%) were men, in the productive age group (90.4%) and on sick leave or unemployed (57.2%) during the treatment. Based on the testimonies, three categories associated with adherence to treatment emerged: the desire to live, support for the development of treatment and care provided by the health services. CONCLUSION: For the study sample, adherence to the treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis was related to having a life project and support from the family and health professionals. Free treatment is fundamental for adherence, given the fragilities arising from the social insertion of people affected by the disease. Therefore, special attention is required from the health services to understand patient needs.
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 | 0.006 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".