MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Adaptação transcultural e validação da Hamilton Early Warning Score para o Brasil

2022· article· pt· W4312229518 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Luana Vilela e Vilaça, Fabiana Cristina Pires Bernardinelli, Allana dos Reis Corrêa, Rosali Isabel Barduchi Ohl, Elizabeth Barichello, Suzel Regina Ribeiro Chaváglia

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista gaúcha de enfermagem · 2022
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldMedicine
TopicEmergency and Acute Care Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesGynecologyPhysicsMedicinePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RESUMO Objetivo Adaptar transculturalmente e validar, para a língua portuguesa, a Hamilton Early Warning Score para detectar a deterioração clínica em serviços de emergência. Método Estudo metodológico compreendendo as etapas de tradução, síntese, retrotradução, comitê de especialistas (n=13), pré-teste, envio e análise das propriedades de medidas em uma amostra composta por 188 pacientes. Comparou-se a Canadian Acute Scale Triage com a Hamilton Early Warning Score. Foram utilizados o Coeficiente Kappa Ponderado, Coeficiente de Correlação Intraclasse e de Pearson, Regressão Logística Binária e a Área Sob a Curva Receiver Operating Characteristic para a análise dos dados. Resultados A Hamilton Early Warning Score apresentou confiabilidade excelente, ou seja, α=0,924 (p<0,001). A validade de construto identificou correlação forte e negativa r=-0,75 e a preditiva apresentou um odds ratio de 1,63, IC 95% (1,358-1,918) (p<0,001). Conclusão A Hamilton Early Warning Score em português é válida e confiável para reconhecer pacientes em condição de deterioração clínica em serviços de emergência.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
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 score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.143

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista gaúcha de enfermagemSame topicEmergency and Acute Care StudiesFrench-language works237,207