MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Medidas educativas adotadas no período pós-operatório de prostatectomia: revisão integrativa

2014· article· pt· W3100195816 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bianca Ferreira Mousinho Rêgo, Camila Araújo Florêncio de Lima, Maria Isabel da Conceição Dias Fernandes, Elisandra de Araújo Saldanha, Ana Luísa Brandão de Carvalho Lira, Allyne Fortes Vítor

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista de Enfermagem UFPE on line · 2014
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMale Reproductive Health Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPsychologyNursingMedicineArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Objectives: identifying the educational steps used in patients in the postoperative prostatectomy and establishing a relationship between these measures and the Letters of Health Promotion. Method: an integrative review, with a view to answering the question Results: main educational measures: delivery of educational material, psychosocial and physiological care, support groups, and particular orientation and training. The Ottawa Charter and the Declaration of Santafe were related to all measures. Conclusion: employing the principles of promoting health coadunated with educational measures is important for self-care. Descriptors: Nursing; Health Education; Prostatectomy; Postoperative Care. RESUMO Objetivos : i dentificar as medidas educacionais utilizadas em pacientes no pos-operatorio de prostatectomia e estabelecer relacao entre estas medidas e as Cartas de Promocao a Saude. Metodo : revisao integrativa, com vistas a responder a questao uais as medidas educativas adotadas no periodo de pos-operatorio de prostatectomia? >> Buscou-se nas bases SciVerse Scopus , Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature , Publicacoes Medicas, Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciencias da Saude e The Cochrane Library , entre outubro e novembro de 2012. Para a analise, utilizou-se um instrumento validado e p ara a apresentacao, construiu-se tabela e uma figura. Resultados : principais medidas educativas: entrega de material educativo, atencao psicossocial e fisiologica, grupos de apoio e, principalmente, orientacao e capacitacao. A Carta de Otawa e a Declaracao de Santafe estiveram relacionadas com todas as medidas. Conclusao : empregar os principios da promocao da saude coadunadas com as medidas educativas e importante para o autocuidado. Descritores : Enfermagem; Educacao em Saude; Prostatectomia; Cuidados Pos-Operatorios. RESUMEN Objetivos: identificar las medidas educativas utilizadas en pacientes en el postoperatorio de la prostatectomia y establecer relaciones entre estas medidas y las Cartas de Promocion de la Salud. Metodo: una revision integradora, con el fin de responder a la pregunta SciVerse Scopus , Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature , Publicaciones Medicas, Literatura Latinoamericana y del Caribe en Ciencias de la Salud y The Cochrane Library , entre octubre y noviembre de 2012. Para el analisis utilizo se un instrumento validado para la presentacion, se construyo la tabla y una figura. Resultados: principales medidas educativas: la entrega de material educativo, atencion fisiologica y psicosocial, grupos de apoyo, y en particular la orientacion y la formacion. La Carta de Ottawa y la Declaracion de Santafe estaban relacionadas con todas las medidas. Conclusion: emplear los principios de promocion de la salud coadunadas con medidas educativas es importante para el auto-cuidado. Descriptores: Enfermeria; Educacion para la Salud; Prostatectomia; Cuidado Posoperatorio. Normal 0 21 false false false PT-BR X-NONE X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:Tabela normal; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:Calibri,sans-serif; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Times New Roman; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:Times New Roman; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0190.016
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.352 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista de Enfermagem UFPE on lineSame topicMale Reproductive Health StudiesFrench-language works237,207