MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4251386049 · doi:10.36418/syntax-idea.v3i1.935

[no title]

2021· article· W4251386049 on OpenAlexaff
Guling Setiawan

Bibliographic record

VenueSyntax Idea · 2021
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicPublic Health and Nutrition
Canadian institutionsWiLAN (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPsychologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk memberikan gambaran pengetahuan dan sikap masyarakat tentang HIV/AIDS di RW.06, RW.07 dan RW.15 Kel. Tamansari Wilayah Puskesmas Salam Bandung. Penelitian ini menggunakan design deskriptif kuantitatif. Subjek penelitian ini adalah masyarakat berusia antara 15-49 tahun yang berada di tiga RW Kelurahan Tamansari Wilayah Puskesmas Salam Bandung. Populasi dalam penelitian ini adalah seluruh masyarakat Kelurahan Tamansari Wilayah Puskesmas Salam Bandung. Teknik pengambilan sampel dalam penelitian ini dengan teknik stratified random sampling dengan sampel sebanyak 97 orang. Analisis statistik yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah dengan cara dijumlahkan kemudian dipersentasikan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa pengetahuan masyarakat yang dikategorikan memiliki pengetahuan kurang sebanyak 40,2%, cukup tidak ada (0%) dan memiliki pengetahuan yang baik sebanyak 59,8%. Sedangkan untuk sikap masyarakat yang dikategorikan memiliki sikap yang tidak mendukung (-) sebanyak 46,4% dan dikategorikan memiliki sikap mendukung (+) sebanyak 53,6%. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian, untuk dapat meningkatkan lagi pengetahuan dan sikap masyarakat disarankan petugas kesehatan untuk lebih banyak memberikan informasi atau penyuluhan kepada masyarakat, sehingga diharapkan informasi yang diterima lebih mudah untuk dimengerti dan dilaksanakan.

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)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.653
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3470.175

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.292 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSyntax IdeaSame topicPublic Health and NutritionFrench-language works237,207