Normative proposal to develop and prepare dental offices to perform conscious sedation using nitrous oxide and oxigen mixture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
O presente estudo objetiva mostrar ao Cirurgião Dentista, os quesitos necessários para se formar um Odontólogo apto a praticar a sedação inalatória, bem como os itens de segurança e de respaldo legal que deverão compor o seu ambiente de trabalho ao se utiliza desta técnica. O estudo foi fundamentado a partir de revisão de literatura sobre o tema, tendo como metodologia o estilo de Vancouver. A analgesia inalatória pela mistura gasosa de óxido nitroso e oxigênio constitui um excelente instrumento no controle da dor e da ansiedade dos pacientes durante o tratamento odontológico. É importante observar que a técnica de analgesia inalatória pela mistura gasosa de óxido nitroso e oxigênio deve ser realizada por meio de normatização técnica para garantir a eficiência da técnica e evitar transtornos. O roteiro proposto no trabalho visa apresentar as características de segurança e detalhamento das especificações técnicas dos estabelecimentos de assistência odontológica para o emprego da técnica de analgesia inalatória pela mistura gasosa de óxido nitroso e oxigênio.
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 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.003 |
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".