TOMA DE DECISIONES EN SALUD EN MUJERES CUIDADORAS INFORMALES HEALTH DECISION-MAKING IN WOMAN’S INFORMAL CARETAKERS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Estudio descriptivo y transversal que se propuso conocer las características biosociodemográficas y los determinantes de la toma de decisiones en salud de las mujeres cuidadoras informales del sector urbano de la comuna de Hualqui, Chile. Las muestra accidental fue de 55 mujeres (62% del universo), a las cuales se les aplicaron dos instrumentos: cuestionario para recolectar antecedentes biosociodemográficos y un cuestionario de valoración de necesidades de apoyo decisional a nivel poblacional basado en el Modelo de Ottawa de O’Connors. Para la tabulación de los datos y análisis descriptivo se utilizó SPSS. Los principales resultados fueron: el cuidado informal lo realizan mujeres entre 41 y 64 años, con educación básica incompleta, que sostienen en un 43% enfermedades crónicas; sus principales conflictos decisionales respecto a salud se refieren a seguir o no conductas curativas y preventivas por la necesidad de estar bien para cuidar a otros A descriptive and cross sectional study whose aim is to determine the biosociodemographic characteristics and making health decisions variables in informal women’s caretakers in Hualqui, Chile. The purposeful sample was 55 women (62% of the universe) to which two instruments were applied: a biosociodemographic questionnaire and decisional support needs of valuation questionnaire at community level, based on the Pattern of Ottawa of O’Connors. For data tabulation and descriptive analysis, SPSS was used. The main results were: care is carried out by women between 41 and 64 years, with incomplete elementary education that 43% of chronic illnesses; their main decision-making conflicts regarding health refer to have to continue or not on healing and preventive behaviours, for the need of being well to take care of others
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".