MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7033115325

Percepción del apoyo familiar en los pacientes del Centro de Salud “La Tulpuna”, en la provincia de Cajamarca, periodo 2019

2019· dissertation· en· W7033115325 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuerenati · 2019
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Taxonomy and Phylogenetics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Family supportPopulationData collectionFamily healthCensusSample (material)Social supportHealth careCenter (category theory)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this research was to determine the level of family support perceived by patients of the Health Center "La Tulpuna" in the province of Cajamarca during the period 2018. The type of research was descriptive, quantitative, non-experimental design, cutting cross. The study population is comprised of 50 adult patients between 18 and 60 years old, who attend the Health Center "La Tulpuna", attended during the last quarter of the 2018 period. The sample was census that is to say it was composed of the entire population. 
\nFor the data collection of the family support variable, the survey technique was used and as a tool the family support questionnaire was used, which was validated and submitted to reliability test. The results showed that 56% of patients are female, 48% are between 18 and 30 years of age, 31% are married, 46% are served less than 1 year in the Health Center, 40% has a nuclear or single parent family. It is also concluded that the level of family support perceived by patients of the Health Center "La Tulpuna" is good, due to the support they receive from their relatives, such as understanding, affection and respect; which also contributes to continue their treatment and recovery.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.601
Threshold uncertainty score0.783

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuerenatiSame topicPlant Taxonomy and PhylogeneticsFrench-language works237,207