MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411943002 · doi:10.37885/250619473

O Impacto Emocional do AVC no Adulto Jovem: Revisão Integrativa da Literatura

2025· book-chapter· pt· W4411943002 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Filipa Bancaleiro Fachadas, Rogério Ferreira, Ana Filipa de Sousa Valente

Bibliographic record

VenueEditora Científica Digital eBooks · 2025
Typebook-chapter
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPhysical Education and Sports Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePsychologyHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objetivo: O objetivo norteador deste estudo consiste em compreender o impacto emocional do AVC no doente adulto jovem. Métodos: Foi efetuada uma Revisão Integrativa da Literatura (RIL) utilizando a metodologia PI[C]O com vista à formulação da pergunta de investigação e sustentada pela metodologia de Toronto e Remington (2020). Realizaram-se as pesquisas na base de dados MEDLINE Ultimate e CINAHL Ultimate. Foram estabelecidos critérios de inclusão e após screening dos artigos apurados incluíram-se cinco que serviram de base à reflexão deste estudo. Resultados: Referente aos estudos selecionados, os mesmos apresentam resultados bem definidos quanto ao impacto emocional negativo, e por vezes incapacitante, vivido pelos doentes após o episódio de Acidente Vascular Cerebral. Discussão: O estudo expõe a necessidade de um apoio constante e individual aos doentes, com vista a ver diminuídos sentimentos negativos decorrentes do seu grau de incapacidade condicionado pelo episódio de AVC, assumindo-se ainda uma influência negativa entre estes sentimentos e a recuperação funcional dos doentes. Conclusão: Identificou-se que a depressão pós AVC é uma manifestação emocional recorrente no adulto jovem, associando-se de forma significativa à deterioração funcional, à diminuição da qualidade de vida e à menor adesão aos processos de reabilitação.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0110.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEditora Científica Digital eBooksSame topicPhysical Education and Sports StudiesFrench-language works237,207