O conhecimento a respeito da Manobra de Heimlich por mães da rede social Facebook
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objetivo: analisar o conhecimento a respeito da Manobra de Heimlich por mães da rede social Facebook, tendo como problema de pesquisa o seguinte questionamento: “Durante o pré-natal na rede pública a mãe recebeu orientações sobre a manobra de Heimlich? Que conhecimento as mães tem sobre a manobra de Heimlich.” Método: Foi utilizada a abordagem qualitativa e método descritivo para este estudo, seguindo os pressupostos de Ludke e André (1986). Resultados: Foram entrevistadas 7 mulheres com idade entre 23 e 40 anos que responderam os questionamentos a respeito da Manobra de Heimlich no pré-natal e falaram sobre seus conhecimentos prévios a respeito do tema. Conclusão: As entrevistas realizadas revelam que as mulheres possuem conhecimento superficial a respeito da Manobra de Heimlich, no entanto esse conhecimento não foi obtido em seu pré-natal, mas sim por conta própria ou por necessidade. Descritores: Engasgo; Manobra De Heimlich; Pré-Natal.
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 | 0.005 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".