MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399471785 · doi:10.47820/recima21.v5i1.5414

HIDROXIAPATITA DE CÁLCIO NA HARMONIZAÇÃO GLÚTEA

2024· article· pt· W4399471785 on OpenAlexaff
Caroline Cabral Campos, Roberto De Melo Santos

Bibliographic record

VenueRECIMA21 - Revista Científica Multidisciplinar - ISSN 2675-6218 · 2024
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatologic Treatments and Research
Canadian institutionsMicrosemi (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhysicsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A busca por procedimentos de medicina estética para aprimorar a aparência corporal tem crescido significativamente, com uma ênfase particular na harmonização glútea. A região glútea desempenha um papel crucial na estética corporal, influenciando diretamente a proporção e a silhueta do corpo. Nesse contexto, a hidroxiapatita de cálcio surge como uma alternativa promissora para alcançar resultados duradouros e naturais. O objetivo deste estudo é revisar a literatura científica disponível sobre o uso da hidroxiapatita de cálcio na harmonização glútea, abordando aspectos relacionados à anatomia dos glúteos, mecanismos de ação, procedimentos de aplicação, resultados clínicos, complicações potenciais e comparação com outras opções de tratamento. A hidroxiapatita de cálcio demonstrou eficácia na volumização e firmeza dos glúteos, com resultados duradouros e naturais. Os estudos revisados destacaram sua capacidade de estimular a produção de colágeno, melhorando a textura e a sustentação da pele ao longo do tempo. A hidroxiapatita de cálcio representa uma opção segura e eficaz para a harmonização glútea, proporcionando benefícios estéticos significativos. No entanto, é fundamental uma abordagem individualizada, considerando as características do paciente e os riscos associados. Com uma avaliação criteriosa e acompanhamento adequado, é possível obter resultados satisfatórios e seguros na harmonização glútea com esse material.

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)0.002
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.319 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRECIMA21 - Revista Científica Multidisciplinar - ISSN 2675-6218Same topicDermatologic Treatments and ResearchFrench-language works237,207