MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7005299434

\\"Proposta de normatização técnica para instalação e funcionamento de estabelecimentos odontológicos a utilizarem sedação consciente por analgesia inalatória através de mistura gasosa de óxido nitroso e oxigênio\\"

2006· article· pt· W7005299434 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAmericanae (AECID Library) · 2006
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldMedicine
TopicBiological and pharmacological studies of plants
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)ExpirationWork (physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

O presente estudo objetiva mostrar ao Cirurgião Dentista, os quesitos necessários para se formar um Odontólogo apto a praticar a sedação inalatória, bem como os itens de segurança e de respaldo legal que deverão compor o seu ambiente de trabalho ao se utiliza desta técnica. O estudo foi fundamentado a partir de revisão de literatura sobre o tema, tendo como metodologia o estilo de Vancouver. A analgesia inalatória pela mistura gasosa de óxido nitroso e oxigênio constitui um excelente instrumento no controle da dor e da ansiedade dos pacientes durante o tratamento odontológico. É importante observar que a técnica de analgesia inalatória pela mistura gasosa de óxido nitroso e oxigênio deve ser realizada por meio de normatização técnica para garantir a eficiência da técnica e evitar transtornos. O roteiro proposto no trabalho visa apresentar as características de segurança e detalhamento das especificações técnicas dos estabelecimentos de assistência odontológica para o emprego da técnica de analgesia inalatória pela mistura gasosa de óxido nitroso e oxigênio.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.251 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmericanae (AECID Library)Same topicBiological and pharmacological studies of plantsFrench-language works237,207