PRE-NATAL IN THE FAMILY HEALTH PROGRAM (PSF): WITH THE WORD, THE NURSES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The pre-natal check-up is fundamental to the motherhood preparation. It should not be faced as a simple doctor’s assistance but as a prevention work of intercurrences obstetric-clinical and emotional assistance. So it was aimed in this study to identify the pre-natal check -ups, carried out by the nurses in the Family Health Programme (PSF), in Campina Grande – Paraíba. The sample consisted of 24 nurses that worked in the FHP, the study was of a transversal kind, descriptive, with a quantitative approach. The data were collected through a structured formularies constituted by open and closed questions. It was observed that 25% of the nurses had a specialization in obstetrics, 79,16 % indicated the first quarter as an ideal period to the beginning of the pre-natal. 35,7% of the interviewed monthly take care from 20-30 pregnant and 87,5% believe to be necessary more than 6 consults in order to have a good attendance of the pregnant. Exams as blood group, and Rh factor, haemogram, serology to syphilis were the most remembered and required by the totality of the interviewed. All the nurses checked the uterine height measurement during the clinical exam, and 70,83 % indicated the necessity to have an ultra-sonography every 3 quarters in order to have a good attendance of the pre-natal. Before the exposed it was noticed that the technical capacity of the professionals agree with the recommendation of the Department of Health, however many variables that implies in the success of the pre-natal check-up is out of the responsibilities of the professional to find explanations in others paradigms, as a reflexive education, for example, and the investments in social and health politics.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".