MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2793418445 · doi:10.24853/jkk.14.1.48-55

Hubungan Merokok dan Pendidikan terhadap Fungsi Kognitif Civitas Akademika di Lingkungan Universitas Muhammadiyah Jakarta

2018· article· id· W2793418445 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Risky Akaputra, RR. Hestin Diah Prasanty

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Kedokteran dan Kesehatan · 2018
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Methods and Media Use
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhysicsGynecologyMedicineArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Perilaku merokok masih merupakan masalah kesehatan dunia karena dapat menyebabkan berbagai penyakit dan bahkan kematian. Salah satu kandungan rokok yaitu nikotin memiliki efek terhadap otak antara lain menyebabkan ketergantungan dan toksisitas pada fungsi kognitif. Tujuan penelitian ini untuk mengetahui hubungan merokok (derajat merokok dan ketergantungan nikotin) dan pendidikan terhadap fungsi kognitif di lingkungan Universitas Muhammadiyah Jakarta. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian dengan desain studi cross sectional yang menggunakan kuesioner baku brinkman, fagerstorm dan Montreal Cognitive Assessment versi Indonesia (MoCA-Ina). Pengambilan sampel dilakukan dengan cara consecutive sampling dimana subjek yang sesuai dengan kriteria inklusi dimasukkan sampai jumlah yang diperlukan terpenuhi, jumlah sampel pada penelitian ini berjumlah 96 responden. Kriteria inklusi dalam penelitian ini adalah orang yang berusia 18-50 tahun dan memiliki kebiasaan merokok. Berdasarkan hasil uji Chi Square diketahui terdapat hubungan yang signifikan antara derajat merokok (p=0.024), ketergantungan nikotin (p=0.021), dan pendidikan (p=0.014) terhadap fungsi kognitif. Kata kunci: merokok, pendidikan, fungsi kognitif

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.104

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0310.005

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Kedokteran dan KesehatanSame topicEducational Methods and Media UseFrench-language works237,207