Análise da dor crônica em mulheres pós mastectomia com ou sem radioterapia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To compare the characteristics of chronic pain in women who underwent surgery for breast cancer and who received or not radiotherapy. Methods: A study with a quantitative approach and transversal character was carried out. The sample was divided into 2 groups: women who underwent mastectomy and radiotherapy (GR = 8) and women who underwent mastectomy only (GNR = 9), after at least three months postoperatively. The following instruments were applied: evaluation form, McGill questionnaire, Body Map, Visual Analogue Scale, in addition to the measurement of perimetry. Results: Pain was present in 94.11% of the participants, and in both groups the pain started after the surgery, with daily frequency and short duration. The pushing and pulling movements were cited by 75% of the participants of the RG as causing pain, in the GNR, the reaching movement was the most cited (44%). Regarding sensitivity, the lateral region of the chest was significantly different between the groups. As for the McGill questionnaire, low intensity pain was observed for both groups and the most used descriptors were tiring (87.50%), boring (75%), nauseated (62.50%), frightening (62.50%) and pulling (62.50%) for the RG and hooked (77.77%), needling (66.66%), tiring (66.66%), nauseated (66.66%), frightening (66.66%), punishing (66.66%) and miserable (66.66%) for the GNR. Conclusion: Chronic pain after breast cancer treatment was high in both groups. Although of low intensity, the pain affected the performance of movements and activities of daily living. Thus, care is needed to relieve pain, considering its specificities.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".