FAKTOR-FAKTOR YANG MEMPENGARUHI TINGKAT PERILAKU HIDUP BERSIH DAN SEHAT PADA TATANAN RUMAH TANGGA DI WILAYAH KERJA PUSKESMAS PONED X
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Latar Belakang: PHBS merupakan salah satu strategi pemerintah untuk mencapai tujuan pembangunan kesehaatan. Faktorfaktoryang mempengaruhi perilaku hidup sehat yaitu faktor predisposisi, faktor pemungkin dan Faktor penguat. Laporantahunan pada tahun 2015 di puskesmas X, didapatkan data cakupan rumah tangga yang melakukan kegiatan Perilaku HidupBersih dan Sehat (PHBS) di wilayah kerja puskesmas poned X sekitar 48,2% masih belum mencapai target nasional padatahun 2014 sebesar 70%Metode: Desain penelitian cross sectional. Pengambilan sampel dengan teknik purposive sampling.Jumlah sampel 380 orang. Pelaksanaan penelitian dilakukan di 5 kelurahan di wilayah kerja puskesmas X. HasilPenelitian:Berdasarkan hasil kuesioner didapatkan jumlah responden yang tidak berprilaku PHBS rumah tangga sebanyak227 orang (59.7%), sedangkan jumlah berprilaku PHBS rumah tangga sebanyak 153 orang (40.3%). Hasil analisis multivariateregresi logistik didapatkan hubungan yang signifikan antara usia dengan tingkat perilaku PHBS rumah tangga (p =0,003)serta tingkat pengetahuan dengan tingkat perilaku PHBS rumah tangga (p =0,000), dan tidak didapatkan hubungan yangsignifikan antara pendidikandengan tingkat perilaku PHBS rumah tangga(p = 0,206). Kesimpulan: Terdapat hubunganantara usia dan tingkat pengetahuan dengan perilaku PHBS rumah tangga, sedangkan tidak terdapat hubungan antarapendidikandengan perilaku PHBS rumah tangga.Kata Kunci : PHBS rumah tangga, usia, pengetahuan, pendidikan
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.004 |
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".