INSEGURANÇA ALIMENTAR E NUTRICIONAL ENTRE ADULTOS COM DOENÇA FALCIFORME: UM PROTOCOLO DE REVISÃO DE ESCOPO
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Scoping Review to investigative the causes and manifestations of food and nutrition insecurity in adults with sickle cell disease. Method: scoping review of the developed following the recommendations proposed by the JBI manual. The search sources will be: SCIELO, LILACS (BVS), MEDLINE via PubMed, COCHRANE LIBRARY (Wiley), CINAHL (Ebsco), SCOPUS (Elsevier), Web of Science Core Collection (Clarivate Analytics), EMBASE (Elsevier), theses and dissertations will be analyzed in the databases of Google Scholar and Periodical Portal of the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES, DART-E theses Europe; OATD - Open Access Theses and Dissertations, Canadian Theses and Dissertations Portal, Database of African Theses and Dissertations and Research (DATAD-R). Publications will be selected by two independent reviewers and disagreements will be analyzed by a third reviewer. For analysis of references (remove duplications, organization, inclusion and exclusion according to the adopted inclusion criteria) we will use EndNote Web 20 (Clarivate Analytics, PA, USA) and Rayyan Data will be extracted with the help of an instrument developed by the reviewers and the results will be presented through charts, flowcharts and narrative synthesis. This review will follow the recommendations proposed by the JBI methodology for the same and will use the Preferred Reporting Items for Scope Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) extension as a reporting guideline. A preliminary review was carried out in March 2023 using the terms Medical Subject Headings (MeSH): “nutrition” and “sickle cell disease” in the databases of PUBMED and CINAHL and PROSPERO, Pubmed and OSF for knowledge of the subject and identification of studies of scoping review with the same phenomenon, but no protocol with the present theme was found
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.279 | 0.731 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".