MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Postoperational nursing of children with Williams Syndrome

2008· article· en· W3032673736 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
韩萍, 何萍萍

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œJournal of practical nursing · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicWilliams Syndrome Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePediatric nursingNursingPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

主动脉瓣上狭窄(SVAS)是最少见的一种先天性主动脉狭窄,Toronto儿童医院报道主动脉瓣上狭窄仅占主动脉狭窄的0.12%[1],若合并多器官功能紊乱则称为Williams综合征.表现为血钙特高,弱智,生长发育落后,性情狂乱好动等,常伴有肺动脉狭窄[2].手术治疗主要纠正其心脏畸形,术后严密的病情观察及给予正确的针对性的护理措施能提升护理质量,减少并发症.1999年4月-2007年4月我科收治10例Williams综合征患儿,术后护理效果明显,现报道如下。

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.288 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œJournal of practical nursingSame topicWilliams Syndrome ResearchFrench-language works237,207