MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

IMPACTO DA PANDEMIA PELO NOVO CORONAVÍRUS NO PERFI L DE CONSUMO DE ANSIOLÍTICOS E ANTIDEPRESSIVOS NA ATENÇÃO BÁSICA DO DISTRITO FEDERAL, BRASIL

2021· article· pt· W4205401179 on OpenAlexaff
Kaic Leite Meira, Fernanda Junges De Araújo, Rafael Cardinali Rodrigues

Bibliographic record

VenueInfarma - Ciências Farmacêuticas · 2021
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldComputer Science
TopicHealthcare during COVID-19 Pandemic
Canadian institutionsNortel (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)HumanitiesInternal medicinePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A pandemia pelo novo Coronavírus proporcionou o aumento da vulnerabilidade psicossocial bem como o agravo das patologias preexistentes, como depressão e ansiedade. Neste sentindo, o objetivo deste trabalho é avaliar o impacto da pandemia da COVID-19 no consumo de ansiolíticos e antidepressivos na UBS 4 do Recanto das Emas – Distrito Federal. Trata-se de um estudo observacional, com corte transversal, que analisou o consumo de ansiolíticos e antidepressivos no período entre fevereiro a agosto de 2019 e 2020, utilizando o consumo médio mensal e o número de atendimentos. Além disso, verifi cou-se também as informações de sexo e idade para traçar um perfi l de consumo destes medicamentos. Dos 7 medicamentos avaliados, todos apresentaram um aumento no consumo em 2020, sendo este de 181,90%, 124,36%, 325,33%, 125%, 12,80%, 22,18% e 6,45% para a fl uoxetina 20mg, amitriptilina 25mg, Imipramina 25 mg, clomipramina 75 mg, diazepam 5 mg, clonazepam 2 mg e clonazepam 2,5 mg/mL respectivamente. Com relação ao perfi l encontrado, houve uma predominância do gênero feminino e da população com idade entre 20 a 59 anos, como consumidores majoritários desses medicamentos. De maneira geral, foi observado um grande impacto nos perfi s de consumo dos psicotrópicos no período de tempo avaliado.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.206
Threshold uncertainty score0.410

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInfarma - Ciências FarmacêuticasSame topicHealthcare during COVID-19 PandemicFrench-language works237,207