O PROBLEMA METODOLÓGICO E POLITICO DE RECOLHER EVIDÊNCIAS EMPÍRICAS EM REGIÕES ARRISCADAS DA REALIDADE AMAZÔNICA: PROBLEMATIZAÇÕES PARA A EDUCAÇÃO POPULAR EM SAÚDE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
O artigo reflete sobre o desaparecimento de evidências como ameaças, riscos ou violênciasnas praticas de promoção da saúde para convergir ao discurso social desejável na planificação e gestão em saúde. As agências internacionais projetam um mundo onde as subversões são ausentes. Poucos estudos se atreviam em discutir a censura de situações de ameaça de vida ao nível local em realizar as ações planejadas. Uma autoetnografia relata as experiências na região amazônica como moradora e enfermeira nos programas de controle da Hanseníase e da AIDS nos anos 90. Os resultados esquematizam o confronto entre o discurso consensual das agências internacionais, a gestão de programa em saúde e as observações de quem faz o trabalho.
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 | 0.081 | 0.192 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.021 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".