MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7143804418 · doi:10.50818/00000003

血液透析中のソシオエステティックの効果 客観的視点による評価

2020· article· ja· W7143804418 on OpenAlexaff
Richiko FUKUMORI, Yumiko MATSUOKA, Hiroko SAKAMOTO, Manabu KIYOOKA, Hiroe MISTUE, Naoshi FURUKAWA, Yuriko Otsubo, Shigeru Otsubo, Kenichi KUME

Bibliographic record

VenueInstitutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageja
FieldPsychology
TopicMusic Therapy and Health
Canadian institutionsCanadian Association of Occupational Therapists
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess (computing)Identification (biology)Product (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

血液透析患者は透析中、拘束感や不安や緊張を伴うことがある。ソシオエステティックとは、人道的・福祉的観点から精神的・肉体的・社会的な困難を抱えている人に対し、医療や福祉の知識に基づいて行う総合的なエステティックである。今回、透析中にソシオエステを施術し、リラックスして透析が受けられるかを検討した。対象は外来維持透析患者6例。透析中、ソシオエステを30分間施行。施術前後の血圧と脈拍数、唾液アミラーゼ活性値を測定した。血圧は施術前後で有意差を認めなかった。脈拍は施術前74±14beat/minより施術後70±13beat/minと有意に低下した(p=0.02)。施術前後の唾液アミラーゼ値は有意な変化を示さなかった。しかし、施術前60KU/Lであった2例は施術後10KU/L以下に低下しており、施術後は1例を除いて全例30KU/L以下であった。血液透析中に安全かつ効果的にソシオエステティックの施術ができた。(著者抄録)

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.067
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInstitutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB)Same topicMusic Therapy and HealthFrench-language works237,207