POTENCIAL TERAPÊUTICO DA VITAMINA D EM PACIENTES COM DOENÇA RENAL CRÔNICA: REVISÃO SISTEMÁTICA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objetivo: avaliar o potencial terapêutico da vitamina D e seus análogos em paciente com DRC. Método: Trata-se de uma revisão sistemática, conforme os passos propostos pela metodologia Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Foram usadas as bases de dados SciELO, Medline, PubMed e LILACS para o levantamento dos artigos. A qualidade metodológica das investigações foi realizada por meio do método de Jadad e Newcastle-Ottawa (NOS). Resultados: Foram identificados 132 artigos iniciais, dos quais 5 foram selecionados para revisão atendendo a todos os critérios de elegibilidade. Os resultados indicaram que o uso da vitamina D como terapia medicamentosa em pacientes com DRC contribuiu para melhorar a função endotelial dos vasos através da diminuição da rigidez vascular, apresentou ação protetora contra infecções através de imunomodulação, diminuição do paratormônio (PTH) e estabilização da taxa de filtração glomerular (TFG). Considerações Finais: Nesse sentido, pode-se concluir que a vitamina D torna-se um agente terapêutico para múltiplos tecidos contribuindo na qualidade de vida dos pacientes com DRC.
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 | 0.033 | 0.094 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".