Efektifitas Buku Saku dalam Meningkatkan Pengetahuan Pendamping Ibu Nifas di Kabupaten Mamuju
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Perinatal and neonatal period is a critical period for the baby's life. Two-thirds of infant deaths occur within 4 weeks after delivery and 60% of newborn deaths occur within 7 days after birth. Regular neonatal visits may early detect to prevent infant mortality. The family's role and support is enormous for the regularity of neonatal visits. The objective of the study was to know the effectiveness of the Pocket Book on the Knowledge of the Psychologist's Companion of the Babies' Period and the visit of the neonate. This research uses experimental Pre design. In this study, the subjects in the study consisted of two groups, the intervention group and the non-intervention group. The samples were the nearest relatives and lived in the same house with the mothers who delivered in housemother health service facilities from June to November 2017 in the work area of the Binanga and Puskesmas Padang. The results showed that statistically significant results showed that there were differences in the average score of the puerperal and neonatal visits between the intervention group and the control group, thus the pocket book was effective for the improvement of maternal companion knowledge. Conclusion and Suggestion in this research that pocket book is effective for knowledge enhancement of maternal companion, and hopefully this pocket book need to be tested its validity by experts.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.001 |
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".