MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385859681 · doi:10.29327/1296245.4-1

VIOLÊNCIA EMOCIONAL INFANTIL COMO FATOR DE RISCO AO TRANSTORNO DE CONDUTA

2023· article· pt· W4385859681 on OpenAlexaff
Eduarda Ritacássia Antoniette de Matos, Ana Julia Martins, Julia Gonçalves Soares, Elaine Pettengill

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychological Treatments and Disorders
Canadian institutionsAdidas (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUÇÃO: Erik H. Erikson (PAPALIA, 2012), psicanalista alemãoamericano, criou a teoria psicossocial na qual apresenta os períodos de desenvolvimento como Estágios Psicossociais.Em seus estudos, Erikson evidencia que as experiências vividas pela criança em seus estágios corroboram para a criação de estratégias adaptativas que visam a solução das crises de cada fase; em contrapartida, ele afirma que com a não resolução do problema de forma eficiente há, por consequência, a formação de uma psicopatologia.De forma análoga, Papalia e Martorell (2012) abordam os estudos do desenvolvimento humano como escalas de infância e apresentam os prejuízos provenientes de um processo de crescimento orientado por desadaptações na vida da criança.Os estudos relacionados ao desenvolvimento humano englobam três aspectos importantes, que são interdependentes e estão interligados, para o amadurecimento adequado do indivíduo, são eles físico, cognitivo e psicossocial, isto é, o desenvolvimento físico pode influenciar o desenvolvimento cognitivo, já que uma boa saúde física pode ajudar a melhorar a concentração e o raciocínio.A gravidade de se

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.396
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same topicPsychological Treatments and DisordersFrench-language works237,207