MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

[no title]

2017· article· W4242112853 on OpenAlexaff
Wandi Wandi

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Informasi Kesehatan Indonesia (JIKI) · 2017
Typearticle
Language
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Quality and Satisfaction
Canadian institutionsWiLAN (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHumanitiesGynecologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Penelitian ini dilakukan untuk mendiskripsikan proses implementasi sistem rujukan ibu hamil dan ibu bersalin oleh bidan Polindes di wilayah Kecamatan Dampit dan faktor – faktor yang mendukung dan menghambat pada proses tersebut. Penelitian ini merupakan jenis penelitian kualitatif dengan pendekatan studi kasus. Tehnik pengumpulan data menggunakan wawancara, dokumentasi dan focus group discussion. Informan terdiri atas Kepala Puskesmas, Bidan dan pasien. Pengambilan sampel dengan tehnik purposive sampling. Analisa data dengan analisa isi. Hasil penelitian menggambarkan bahwa jumlah rujukan cukup banyak, SOP sudah tersedia. Tujuan rujukan adalah Puskesmas/Rumah Sakit dan dokter spesialis. Kasus yang dirujuk mengacu pada standar penapisan 18 indikasi rujukan ibu bersalin. Perlengkapan yang dibawa bidan adalah set alat dan obat. Jalur rujukan dari polindes ke Puskesmas, ke Rumah sakit, ke dokter spsesialis, ke Puskesmas lalu ke rumah sakit. Pendampingnya bidan, keluarga dan sopir. Persiapan sebelum dirujuk adalah perlengkapan ibu, perlengkapan bayi, uang dan syarat-syarat administrasi. Alat transportasi menggunakan kendaraan milik pribadi, milik bidan, ambulan desa, ambulan Puskesmas, ambulan Rumah Sakit. Biaya menggunakan asuransi atau membayar tunai. Faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi proses rujukan meliputi: biaya, pasien, pengambilan keputusan, rumah sakit yang dituju, transportasi, kompetensi bidan, status domisili pasien dan kepercayaan masyarakat.

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)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.501
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0100.005
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.4990.309

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 head0.187
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.280 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Informasi Kesehatan Indonesia (JIKI)Same topicHealthcare Quality and SatisfactionFrench-language works237,207