Práticas e ações estratégicas do enfermeiro no consultório na rua: revisão da literatura
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Analisar e descrever as práticas e estratégias para cuidado para pessoas em situação de rua. Revisão integrativa realizado de julho a agosto de 2022, em bases de dados PubMed, Scielo, Web of Science, CINAHL, Lilacs e Scopus. Foram selecionados 11 artigos disponíveis na integra nas bases de dados citadas. Foram elaboradas duas categorias centrais para discussão: Práticas e ações estratégicas para cuidado no consultório na rua e desafios das práticas de cuidado. A prática de cuidado do enfermeiro e as estratégias estão baseadas na criação de vínculo através do acolhimento e escuta qualificada. Surgem como desafios os estigmas, preconceitos e as barreiras impostas as pessoas em situação de rua dentro dos serviços de saúde. Outro desafio apontado são problemas interprofissionais entre as equipes Consultório na Rua e os outros serviços de saúde relatados como pontos de fragilidades e pouca articulação entre os setores.
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 | 0.017 | 0.068 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.018 | 0.029 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".