MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W53567819

[Burns and the family experience as to the hospitalization process].

2008· article· en· W53567819 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Fernanda Loureiro de Carvalho, Lídia Aparecida Rossi, Caroline Lopes Ciofi-Silva

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBurn Injury Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPresentation (obstetrics)Reading (process)PsychologyDynamics (music)Data presentationMedicineData collectionSociologyPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hospital admission due to burning is usually fast and unpredictable. There may be different reactions to trauma according to the phase experienced by the patient and his/her family. This study aimed at describing the impact of the hospitalization of burnt patients on family dynamics. The Calgary Family Assessment Model was applied using semi-structured interviews and direct observation of family members. The following phases were considered for data analysis: reading the material and data reduction, data presentation, conclusion presentation, and verification. The findings showed that family members experience a crisis period that affects their physical and emotional status, relationships, daily routine, management of financial resources, and work. All of these aspects change the family dynamics, contributing for the maintenance of a crisis-adjustment-stability cycle during the entire treatment

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicBurn Injury Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207