MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388127814 · doi:10.55905/cuadv15n10-140

Atuação do psicólogo nos cuidados paliativos de pacientes oncológicos

2023· article· pt· W4388127814 on OpenAlexaff
Francisca Viviane Matos Da Silva, Ádria Laís Onete Matos, Eliza Alves Barreto, Fabiana Ferreira Linhares, Júlio César Pinto De Souza

Bibliographic record

VenueCuadernos de Educación y Desarrollo · 2023
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative and Oncologic Care
Canadian institutionsImpactDiscovery Air (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyPalliative careHumanitiesMedicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A atuação do psicólogo e complexidades existentes dentro do contexto hospitalar são assuntos tão corriqueiros, quanto necessários. A atuação do profissional de saúde vai desde as medidas de prevenção ao processo de luto que ocorre com a finitude. O profissional de psicologia, equipe multidisciplinar e cuidados paliativos foram aspectos base para a construção desta pesquisa. Esta que se deu a partir de cunho qualitativo, com procedimento de dados bibliográficos, onde o objetivo principal consta em discutir a atuação do psicólogo inserido em uma equipe multidisciplinar nos cuidados paliativos de pacientes oncológicos. O psicólogo voltado para os cuidados paliativos direciona sua atuação a compreender o impacto da doença no funcionamento emocional do indivíduo e de sua rede, assim, as intervenções aqui postas consideram aspectos de vinculação para o entendimento dos apegos, aspectos emocionais que exploram e demandam da práxis do psicólogo e, por fim, mais não menos importante, estratégias pelo instrumento da escuta ativa, comunicação, acolhimento das queixas entre os envolvidos e a posterior, suporte psicológico.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 designNot applicable
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 abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCuadernos de Educación y DesarrolloSame topicPalliative and Oncologic CareFrench-language works237,207