Abstracts from the 7th International Conference for Healthcare and Medical Students (ICHAMS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
MethodsThe study focused on 82 patients with normal weight and/or with abdominal obesity, ambulatory care, Caucasians, aged 16 to 49 years old, IMC>28.The patients were studied between November 2015 and May 2017 and the ratio of women to men was 3/1.Clinical and biochemical parameters were evaluated to appreciate the cardiovascular and diabetes risk profile, neurological and cardio-respiratory functional investigations were performed, as well as the psychological evaluation (DSM-IV questionnaire.The final results have been interpreted statistically and cognitive-behavioral therapy has also been applied. ResultsThe results obtained from the study cases have been divided based on the personality type.85.2% of the patients have eating disorders and 26% present moderate and high cardiovascular risk in the next 10 years, women between 30 and 49 years old being the majority.Discussion A multidisciplinary approach can change eating behavior on a long term.The maximum effectiveness on cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) could easily be observed on the group studies centered on self-affirmation development.Metabolic profile has also been improved, due to CBT.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.147 | 0.036 |
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".