Bariatric surgery and perioperative education: The look of patients who are waiting for surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To know the perception of patients who expect the performance of bariatric surgery on perioperative education.Methods: Exploratory study performed with patients from the preoperative period of bariatric surgery in a reference institution in the realization of the surgical procedure by the Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS) in the State of Ceará, Brazil, in January 2019, through a focal group.Results: Five categories related to the perception of the subjects about the perioperative education were identified: “Imagining what life will be like after the bariatric surgery”; “Fear and anxiety with the performance of bariatric surgery”; “Preoperative preparation and follow-up in the health service”; “Resolution of doubts during the preoperative preparation” and “Main doubts of those who are still in the preoperative”.Conclusions: It was evident that the participants recognized the importance of the preoperative follow-up of bariatric surgery, highlighted as beneficial the occurrence of educational strategies in this period for the acquisition of knowledge and resolution of doubts, especially about the surgical procedure and postoperative care.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".