MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991539845 · doi:10.5102/pic.n1.2018.6368

Validação de instrumentos sobre crenças e hábitos em relação ao tabagismo

2019· article· pt· W2991539845 on OpenAlexaff
STEPHANIE SILVA, Marina Kohlsdorf

Bibliographic record

VenuePrograma de Iniciação Científica - PIC/UniCEUB - Relatórios de Pesquisa · 2019
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth, Drugs, and Violence
Canadian institutionsQuest University Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyHumanitiesMedicineArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

No Brasil existem aproximadamente 18 milhões de fumantes, sendo os jovens adultos eadolescentes, principalmente estudantes, vulneráveis ao vício. Considerando que o hábitotabagista desencadeia uma série de doenças e complicações de saúde, deve ser alvo de estudos e programas de prevenção. Nesse contexto, o objetivo do estudo é validar instrumentos sobre crenças e hábitos em relação ao tabagismo. Participaram da pesquisa 30 estudantes universitários, sendo 50% homens e 50% mulheres, 63,33% entre 22 e 25 anos, 60% entre o 7º e o 10º semestre, 66,66% iniciaram o hábito entre os 14 e 17 anos. Os participantes responderam um questionário contendo 80 itens para avaliação entre 1 (discordo totalmente) e 5 (concordo totalmente), além de 3 questões de resposta aberta. Foram realizadas análises descritivas de média, desvio padrão e número, que permitiram concluir a forte relação do hábito dos universitários com a socialização e o consumo de bebidas alcoólicas, e também como o hábito não aparenta prejudicar as atividades desempenhadas pelos participantes

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.524
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0050.001
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.005

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.287 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePrograma de Iniciação Científica - PIC/UniCEUB - Relatórios de PesquisaSame topicYouth, Drugs, and ViolenceFrench-language works237,207