ANALISIS BIBLIOMETRIK PROGRAM PARENTING TERHADAP PENCEGAHAN PENGANIAYAAN PADA ANAK
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Artikel ini bertujuan melihat tren penelitian, penulis, dan negara yang paling berpengaruh dalam topik program parenting terhadap pencegahan penganiayaan anak. Metode yang digunakan berupa analisis bibliometrik dimana penelitian ini akan menunjukkan hasil berupa data statistik. Kata kunci menggunakan istilah “parenting program” dan sinonim lainnya, dan digabungkan dengan istilah “child maltreatment” dan sinonim lainnya untuk mencari artikel yang sesuai. Artikel yang diikutsertakan sebanyak 605 artikel dari database Scopus. Data dianalisis dan divisualisasikan dengan menggunakan aplikasi VOSviewer. Temuan menunjukkan bahwa penelitian ini banyak dilakukan di negara-negara maju seperti United States, United Kingdom, dan Canada. Sanders M. R. menjadi penulis berpengaruh dalam topik ini. Beberapa hasil temuan kata kunci juga menjadi rujukan untuk penelitian masa depan seperti program parenting terhadap child maltreatment menggunakan meta-analisis dan efektifitasnya.
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 | 0.006 | 0.045 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.051 | 0.097 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.114 | 0.028 |
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".