MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3129521473 · doi:10.33088/jmk.v13i2.573

EVALUASI PENATALAKSANAAN PROGRAM PENGELOLAAN PENYAKIT KRONIS (PROLANIS) DI PUSKESMAS KOTA BENGKULU

2020· article· en· W3129521473 on OpenAlexaff
Avrilya Iqoranny Susilo, Satibi Satibi, Tri Murti Andayani

Bibliographic record

VenueJURNAL MEDIA KESEHATAN · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPublic Health and Nutrition
Canadian institutionsQuest University Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineQuality of life (healthcare)Family medicineEnvironmental healthPhysical therapyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Health Chronic Disease Management Program (Prolanis) BPJS Health as a system of health services and proactive approach implemented in an integrated manner involving participants, health facilities and BPJS Health becomes an important factor because it becomes one of the indicators of the fulfillment of the commitment of service at puskesmas. This study aims to determine the management of Prolanis which includes membership, activities, availability of drugs and availability of funds Prolanis, knowing the barriers to the implementation of Prolanis and know the ratio of visits and quality of life of participants Prolanis. The research was conducted by descriptive method through interview technique, check list and WHOQoL questionnaire for quality of life measurement. Data retrieval used primary data by interviewing 40 informants and filling questionnaire on 262 participants of Prolanis. The secondary data was obtained from P-Care Puskesmas application. Analysis of the results of research was using descriptive analysis with narrative exposure accompanied by data tables. The results showed that from 20 Puskesmas 1 Puskesmas had not fulfilled the minimum requirement of Prolanis formation, 4 Puskesmas had not conducted gymnastic and educational activities, 2 Puskesmas did not implement pharmacy service standard for drug distribution Prolanis and 4 Puskesmas had not utilized Prolanis fund provided by BPJS Kesehatan. 50% in some puskesmas cause puskesmas to be in unsafe zone for assessment of capitation indicator. For measurement of quality of life of participants Prolanis obtained 95, 04% of respondents have good quality of life.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.411
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJURNAL MEDIA KESEHATANSame topicPublic Health and NutritionFrench-language works237,207