Accessibility of children with special health needs to the health care network
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To know how children with special health needs access the health care network. METHOD: This is a qualitative research of descriptive-exploratory type, developed using semi-structured interviews mediated by the Talking Map design. Participants were 19 family caregivers of these children in two Brazilian municipalities. Data were submitted to inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Difficulties were mentioned from the diagnosis moment to the specialized follow-up, something represented by the itinerary of the c hild and his/her family in the search for the definition of the medical diagnosis and the access to a specialized professional; a gap between the children's needs and the care offered was observed in primary health care. CONCLUSION: The access of children with special health needs is filled with obstacles such as slowness in the process of defining the child's diagnosis and referral to a specialist. Primary health care services were replaced by care in emergency care units.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it