MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2914358120 · doi:10.5585/conssaude.v17n4.8532

Avaliação de crianças atendidas em follow-up: perfil epidemiológico e motor

2018· article· pt· W2914358120 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mayara Cruz Vargas, Ayrles Silva Gonçalves Barbosa Mendonça, Aléxia Gabriela da Silva Vieira, Ana Beatriz da Costa Lameira, Nely Sampaio Guinther, Tiótrefis Gomes Fernandes, Ana Paula Guimarães Dias Corrêa, Marcos Giovanni Santos Carvalho, Roberta Lins Gonçalves

Bibliographic record

VenueConScientiae Saúde · 2018
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMaternal and Neonatal Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePediatricsGynecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introdução: Crianças prematuras tendem a apresentar atrasos no desenvolvimento neuropsicomotor devido à imaturidade e à propensão de lesões no sistema nervoso central. Objetivo: Descrever o perfil epidemiológico e motor de crianças atendidas no follow-up da Maternidade Balbina Mestrinho (MBM) em Manaus/AM, verificando a associação entre diferentes fatores socioambientais e clínicos com o desenvolvimento motor (DM). Métodos: Foram avaliadas 25 crianças acompanhadas no follow-up da MBM, por meio da Escala Motora Infantil de Alberta e aplicação de questionário estruturado contendo dados clínicos e epidemiológicos. Resultados: Foi detectado que todas as crianças eram prematuras e 44% apresentaram atipicidade no DM, relacionada principalmente a idade corrigida (p=0,015) e ao grau de escolaridade materna (p=0,019). Conclusão: O elevado índice de atipicidade no DM pode estar associado ao perfil amostral, cuja prematuridade infere em fragilidade de seus sistemas. Assim, sugere-se que maiores investigações sejam realizadas, a fim de relacionar outros fatores com o DM.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.320 · 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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConScientiae SaúdeSame topicMaternal and Neonatal HealthcareFrench-language works237,207