MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3201242366 · doi:10.14295/aps.v3i2.210

Gestão da Atenção Primária: uma proposta de avaliação de impacto da APS em duas cidades do Nordeste do Brasil

2021· article· pt· W3201242366 on OpenAlexaff
Galba Freire Moita

Bibliographic record

VenueAPS EM REVISTA · 2021
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, Nursing, Elderly Care
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrimary health carePrimary careWelfare economicsPolitical scienceBusinessNursingMedicineHealth careEconomicsFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Esse estudo apresenta uma proposta de avaliação de impacto na APS a partir da análise contextual da atenção primaria em duas grandes cidades do Ceará, visto que Fortaleza (gestão incremental por OSs) e Sobral (Gestão Pública) representam ambientes privilegiados para a aplicação de modelos avaliativos visando mensurar o impacto, a eficiência, a efetividade e a resolutividade aplicáveis em diferentes contextos da APS do Brasil. Palavras-chave: Direção e Governança do Setor de Saúde, Avaliação de Processos e Resultados (cuidado de saúde), Avaliação em Saúde, Qualidade, Acesso e Avaliação da Assistência à Saúde, Avaliação do Impacto na Saúde. Abstract This study presents a proposal for impact assessment on PHC from the contextual analysis of primary care in two large cities in Ceará, since Fortaleza (incremental management by OSs - non-profit health organization) and Sobral (Public Management) represent privileged environments for the application of evaluation models aiming to measure the impact, efficiency, effectiveness and resoluteness applicable in different contexts of PHC in Brazil. Keywords: Health Sector Stewardship and Governance. Process and Results Evaluation (health care). Health Assessment. Quality, Access and Evaluation of Health Care. Health Impact Assessment.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.172
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.006
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.340 · 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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAPS EM REVISTASame topicHealth, Nursing, Elderly CareFrench-language works237,207