Knowledge Analysis Of Anganwadi Workers During Covid-19 Pandemic Situation In Paralakhemundi Municipality, Gosani Block,Gajapati District Of Odisha: An Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present paper is based on a survey method while attempts have been made to assess the knowledge of the Anganwadi workers who are working as frontline workers during the widespread COVID-19 epidemic at Gosani block of Paralakhemundi municipality, Gajapati district. For the study, structured questionnaire was distributed among the total workers i.e. 350 covering 163 Anganwadi worker centres of 16 wards of Paralakhemundi Municipality. The survey was conducted from March to April 2021 at the beginning stage of the second outbreak of COVID-19. The main purpose of the study is to understand the knowledge of Anganwadi workers with regards to the COVID-19 guidelines. In this regard, focus has been made to analyse knowledge on the four general aspects of COVID-19 including stress level of Anganwadi workers because stress management during this pandemic is essential. Thus, analysis has been made on the use of information sources, knowledge on preventive practices, knowledge on maintaining social distance, knowledge on the use of personal protective equipments (PPE) and causes of stress to manage the situation. The study finds that social media like Whatsapp groups, mobile messages are the principal sources of information for them. The workers have clear knowledge on preventive measures such as hand sanitisation, maintenance of social distance and use of personal protective equipments (PPE). The job is stressful for the workers due to the less educated rural people, their carelessness towards the disease, hiding of the symptoms by the individuals and work overload.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.018 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".