Aplicacao do Modelo Calgary de Avaliacao Familiar no contexto hospitalar e na atencao primaria a saude Revisao integrativa
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objetivo caracterizar as publicacoes sobre a aplicacao do Modelo Calgary de Avaliacao Familiar no contexto hospitalar e na atencaoprimaria a saude divulgadas em periodicos online da area de saude Material e Metodo revisao integrativa da literatura O levantamentodo material foi realizado mediante a busca no portal Capes Pubmed Medline Lilacs BDENF na CidSaude e Ibecs Foram adotadosos seguintes criterios de inclusao artigos online disponiveis na integra publicados nos idiomas portugues ingles e espanhol entreJaneiro de 2008 a dezembro de 2013 A amostra foi composta por 25 trabalhos Resultados os anos 2008 2010 e 2013 evidenciaram umnumero maior de producoes predominaram artigos originais 640 dos estudos foram realizados na atencao primaria a saude Quantoa autoria dos estudos a pesquisa mostrou que houve a participacao do enfermeiro em 880 das publicacoes Conclusoes foi possivelevidenciar que a aplicacao do MCAF tanto no contexto hospitalar quanto na atencao primaria a saude possibilita uma abordagem maisaprofundada sobre a estrutura o desenvolvimento e o funcionamento familiar o que se configura como uma ferramenta efetiva para identificar diagnosticos familiares
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it