Prevenção primordial, Envelhecimento ativo e Reforma faseada: Um Triângulo Saudável?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Segundo a Carta de Ottawa (Organização Mundial de Saúde, 1986) a Promoção da Saúde consiste no processo que visa criar condições para que as pessoas aumentem a sua capacidade de controlar os fatores determinantes da saúde, no sentido de a melhorar.1 A Prevenção é uma das principais componentes de promoção da saúde e ocupa uma grande dimensão no quotidiano do médico de família, implicando o desenvolvimento de diferentes atividades, que podem ser sistematizadas em três vertentes de ação inter-relacionadas e complementares: Educação para a saúde, Prevenção da doença e Proteção da saúde. Atualmente consideram-se 5 níveis de prevenção, mas para o presente assunto destaco a Prevenção Primordial como forma de evitar o estabelecimento de estilos de vida que se sabem contribuir para um riscoacrescido de doença, contemplando para isso políticas e programas de promoção de determinantes positivos de saúde.2 1. World Health Organization. Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion. An international conference on health promotion: The move towards a new public health; 1986 Nov 17-21, Ottawa. Ottawa: WHO; 1987.2. Hespanhol AP, Couto L, Martins C. A
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 | 0.013 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.019 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.024 | 0.027 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 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".