MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382809868 · doi:10.34117/bjdv9n6-127

Apneia obstrutiva do sono e suas repercussões materno-fetais durante a gestação: uma revisão sistemática

2023· article· pt· W4382809868 on OpenAlexaff
Flávio Ramiro Espinoza Resende, Arthur Flores Belaguarda, Felippe Sakr Callou Torres

Bibliographic record

VenueBrazilian Journal of Development · 2023
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular and Diving-Related Complications
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGynecologyHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objetivo: desenvolver, com base na investigação de artigos científicos publicados, a relação da Apneia Obstrutiva do Sono durante a gravidez e seus impactos negativos na saúde materno-fetal. Metodologia: revisão bibliográfica de trabalhos publicados que abordaram o tema entre os anos de 2002 a 2023. Resultados: da pesquisa inicial provieram 452 estudos, após inspeção de títulos e resumos, 33 deles foram elegidos para análise. No balanço de elegibilidade, 21 foram classificados como elegíveis e 7 inelegíveis para inclusão. Conclusão: após exploração e verificação minuciosa dos artigos, evidencia-se a relação íntima entre a apneia obstrutiva do sono e os desfechos nocivos à saúde materna e fetal, principalmente aqueles relacionados à enfermidades que cursam especificamente com o período da gravidez, como pré-eclâmpsia, hipertensão gestacional e diabetes gestacional. No entanto, a escassez de estudos direcionados a estes dois grupos de pacientes, impossibilita a garantia de que estes estejam sendo efetivamente bem diagnosticados e tratados. Assim sendo, o desenvolvimento de mais estudos acerca do tema é urgentemente necessário.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.045
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0150.015
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrazilian Journal of DevelopmentSame topicCardiovascular and Diving-Related ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207