MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4253376867 · doi:10.25311/keskom.vol1.iss3.20

Faktor-Faktor yang Berhubungan dengan Pemanfaatan Pelayanan Posyandu Lansia

2011· article· id· W4253376867 on OpenAlexaff
Nurvi Susanti, Mitra Mitra

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal kesehatan komunitas (Journal of community health) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldMedicine
TopicPublic Health and Nutrition
Canadian institutionsWiLAN (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Laporan Dinas Kesehatan Kota Pekanbaru Tahun 2011 menunjukkan bahwa dari 19 Puskesmas yang ada di Pekanbaru, jumlah lansia terbanyak berada di wilayah kerja Puskesmas Garuda Pekanbaru (7360 orang), sedangkan jumlah kunjungan lansia (cakupan) hanya 14% dari total lansia yang ada. Cakupan ini masih jauh dari target yang diharapkan yaitu 70%. Tujuan penelitian adalah untuk mengetahui faktor-faktor yang berhubungan dengan pemanfaatan pelayanaan posyandu lansia. Desain penelitian adalah cross sectional study dengan sampel sebanyak 199 orang lansia. Cara pengambilan sampel adalah Systematic Random Sampling. Analisis bivariat menggunakan uji chi square, dan analisis multivariat menggunakan uji regresi logistik ganda. Hasil penelitian menunjukan bahwa variabel yang berhubungan signifikan dengan pemanfaatan pelayanaan posyandu lansia adalah sikap (POR: 6,08 95%CI:1,57-23,51), jarak (POR:0,26 95%CI:0,12-0,56), kader (POR:5,06 95%CI: 2,36-10,86), dan pendidikan (POR:2,52 95%CI:1,24-5,14). Variabel dukungan keluarga merupakan variabel konfounding (POR:2,00 95%CI:0,87-4,59). Disarankan pada instansi terkait perlunya dilakukan upaya untuk meningkatkan pemanfaatan pelayanan posyandu lansia melalui promosi dan penyuluhan tentang pemanfaatan posyandu lansia serta meningkatkan pelayanan di posyandu sehingga lansia termotivasi untuk mengunjungi posyandu lansia.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.132
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.013
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal kesehatan komunitas (Journal of community health)Same topicPublic Health and NutritionFrench-language works237,207