MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3167873197 · doi:10.25248/reas.e7350.2021

Incidência de pericardite pós COVID-19 em pacientes de uma clínica cardiológica, no período de março a junho de 2020

2021· article· pt· W3167873197 on OpenAlexaff
Camila Guerreiro Bentes, Mariana Diniz Araújo, Maria Elizabeth Navegantes Caetano, Vítor Bruno Teixeira de Holanda

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Eletrônica Acervo Saúde · 2021
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
Canadian institutionsCytodiagnostics (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)GynecologyInternal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objetivo: Identificar a incidência de pericardite pós- COVID-19 em pacientes atendidos em uma clínica cardiológica, bem como discutir os fatores de risco e possíveis terapêuticas. Métodos: Foi realizada coleta de dados através do protocolo de pesquisa em prontuários de pacientes atendidos na referida clínica, buscando identificar os pacientes de tiveram COVID-19 e destes quais evoluíram com pericardite. Todos os dados foram tabelados utilizando-se o software Microsoft Excel e análise estatística realizada no programa Biostat 5.0. Resultados: Foram encontrados 4 pacientes evoluindo com pericardite aguda pós COVID-19, sendo observada incidência de 11,76%. A maioria dos pacientes apresentou comorbidades cardiocerebrovasculares, que sabidamente estão associadas a pior prognóstico e morbimortalidade na infecção pelo SARS-CoV-2. Todos os pacientes apresentaram desfecho clínico favorável, após tratamento com dose terapêutica usual com colchicina. Conclusão: Conclui-se que apesar de complicação tardia da COVID-19, a pericardite aguda na casuística do estudo, manteve seu padrão autolimitado, assim como sua relevante taxa de incidência assegura as manifestações cardíacas como uma das principais e mais importantes dentre as manifestações extrapulmonares da COVID-19.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.321
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.502
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.321
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.363 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Eletrônica Acervo SaúdeSame topicCOVID-19 Clinical Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207