Management of bed availability in intensive care in the context of hospitalization by court order
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 identify, from the nurse perspective, situations that interfere with the availability of beds in the intensive care unit in the context of hospitalization by court order. METHOD: qualitative exploratory, analytical research carried out with 42 nurses working in adult intensive care. The selection took place by non-probabilistic snowball sampling. Data collected by interview and analyzed using the Discursive Textual Analysis technique. RESULTS: three categories were analyzed, entitled deficiency of physical structure and human resources; Lack of clear policies and criteria for patient admission and inadequate discharge from the intensive care unit. In situations of hospitalization by court order, there is a change in the criteria for the allocation of intensive care beds, due to the credibility of professionals, threats of medico-legal processes by family members and judicial imposition on institutions and health professionals. CONCLUSION: nurses defend the needs of the patients, too, with actions that can positively impact the availability of intensive care beds and adequate care infrastructure.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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