Fatores associados às queixas vocais autorreferidas por agentes comunitários de saúde
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To verify the prevalence of vocal complaints and their association with sociodemographic, economic, occupational, and behavioral factors among the population of Community Health Agents (CHA). METHODS: This is a cross-sectional and analytical study conducted in the city of Montes Claros, MG, in which 674 CHA participated. Data were collected via a self-administered questionnaire that includes sociodemographic, economic, behavioral, occupational, and voice-use aspects based on the Screening Index for Voice Disorder (SIVD). Bivariate analysis was performed by Pearson's chi-square test and Poisson multiple regression with robust variance to verify the association between the variables. RESULTS: There was a high prevalence of vocal complaints, the most cited being dry throat, throat clearing, tiredness when talking, and hoarseness. We observed a significant association between female gender, lack of restful sleep, alcohol use, regular to very poor self-rated health, and anxiety. CONCLUSION: There was a significant percentage of vocal complaints, and the associated factors found will guide actions to promote vocal and general health.
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 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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".