MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Fatores que interferem na história da doença de pessoas com diagnóstico de hipertensão arterial: uma abordagem a partir do genograma e ecomapa

2021· article· pt· W4312347955 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Romário Correia dos Santos, Pâmella Stéphanie Acioli Carneiro, Marina Mota Bastos, Renata Ferreira Tiné, Thaís Carine Lisboa da Silva

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista de APS · 2021
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, Nursing, Elderly Care
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGynecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Na perspectiva do conceito ampliado da saúde, a família e comunidade parecem contribuir nos processos de saúde-doença dos indivíduos e no seu tratamento, sendo sua compreensão importante para a gestão do cuidado. Assim, objetivou-se compreender, por meio de genograma e ecomapa, fatores que interferem na história da doença de pessoas com diagnóstico de hipertensão arterial, acompanhadas na Atenção Primária à Saúde. O estudo teve a participação de 10 indivíduos, adscritos de uma Unidade Básica de Saúde do município de Recife, classificados e separados em dois grupos, compensado ou descompensado para a condição crônica pesquisada. A coleta de dados fez-se por meio do emprego da História de Vida Focal, analisados de acordo com o Modelo Calgary de Avaliação na Família, e posteriormente as informações foram transportadas para genogramas e ecomapas. No grupo de pacientes compensados para hipertensão arterial sugere-se que as coesões sociais, familiares e comunitárias, demonstradas graficamente pelo ecomapa e genograma, influenciam de forma positiva na história da doença e na sua terapêutica. Ao contrário, no grupo de pacientes descompensados, onde há pouca frequência de equipamentos sociais e relacionamentos em conflitos ou cortados, esses aspectos contribuem de alguma forma para um pior controle da condição crônica.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
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 score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.329 · 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista de APSSame topicHealth, Nursing, Elderly CareFrench-language works237,207