Bibliographic record
Abstract
Di Dinas Kesehatan Kabupaten Padang Pariaman terjadi kecenderungan penurunan capaian indikator program kesehatan dalam dua tahun terakhir. Salah satunya disebabkan oleh kurang sempurnanya perencanaan program dan kegiatan yang direncanakan setiap tahunnya. Ini bisa saja terjadi karena dalam proses penyusunan perencanaan tersebut tidak mengikuti alur perencanaan, konsultasi, bimbingan teknis maupun koordinasi. Tujuan penelitian diketahuinya proses penyusunan perencanaan Dinas Kesehatan Kabupaten Padang Pariaman. Metode penelitian menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif dengan teknik wawancara mendalam dengan 17 orang informan. Hasil penelitian menyatakan alur perencanaan belum sesuai dengan langkah perencaaan terpadu, konsultasi belum maksimal, bimbingan teknis langsung ke Bappeda dan koordinasi juga masih belum optimal. Agar perencanaan berkualitas, maka perlu pedoman dalam penyusunan perencanaan, konsultasi perlu dimonitoring pimpinan, bimbingan teknis disosialisasikan dan rapat koordinasi tiap akhir tahun dengan lintas sektor.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.028 | 0.002 |
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".