DEVELOPMENT EVALUATION AMONG FAMILIES OF PEOPLE WITH SUICIDAL BEHAVIOR: AN APPLICATION OF THE CALGARY MODEL
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RESUMO Objetivo: descrever os eventos que marcaram o desenvolvimento da família de pessoas com comportamento suicida. Metodologia: estudo baseado no Modelo Calgary de Avaliação Familiar. Participaram nove famílias de usuários do Núcleo de Estudo e Prevenção do Suicídio, em Salvador - Bahia, Brasil. Coleta de dados online, entre novembro de 2021 e maio de 2022. As perguntas foram estruturadas previamente em um formulário baseado no MCAF. Após transcrição das entrevistas, essas passaram pelos processos de transcriação e textualização. Resultados: entre as categorias que emergiram, destacam-se: Vivência de violência intrafamiliar como fator precipitador de comportamento suicida no ciclo vital das famílias; Abdicação de si em detrimento do cuidado a pessoa com comportamento suicida; e Vínculo com animais como fator protetivo para o comportamento suicida no desenvolvimento da família de pessoas com comportamento suicida. Conclusão: elucidando tais eventos, é possível vincular-se e intervir nos conflitos, bem como utilizá-los como fatores de proteção para as tentativas de suicídio.
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 | 0.007 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
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".