MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3110200124

CALGARY FAMILY ASESSMENT MODEL (CFAM) IN PREVENTION OF ANEMIA IN PRESCHOOLED CHILDREN

2005· article· en· W3110200124 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
S Wiwit Dwi Nurbadriyah and Tri Nurhudi

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Advance Healthcare Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Methods and Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnemiaPediatricsNonprobability samplingEnvironmental healthInternal medicinePopulation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Iron deficiency anemia is a common iron deficiency in children. Iron is a constituent of hemoglobin. The impact of iron deficiency anemia in children will slowly preventing intelligence development of children and make them susceptible to less endurance so become easily sick. The highest prevalence of anemia is at the end of infancy and early childhood preschool age. The role of the mother in the family is very important in the diet of the child and the fulfillment of nutritional needs. This can be known through the CFAM family assessment approach (Calgary Family Assessment Model). The research design is descriptive explorative with 22 respondents from preschool age children at TK Muslimat Curungrejo Kepanjen through purposive sampling technique. CFAM data collection consists of structural, developmental and functional family assessment components. CFAM structural components consist of: number of nuclear families, order of children, gender, family boundaries, extended family, environment, religion, purchasing power.…

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.558
Teacher spread0.394 · 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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of Advance Healthcare Research→Same topicEducational Methods and Impacts→French-language works237,207→