MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377270467 · doi:10.31983/manr.v5i1.9010

Characteristics of Contraceptive Acceptors to the Use of Contraceptive Types

2023· article· en· W4377270467 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dhita Ayu Elvandri, Sri Winarsih, Mundarti Mundarti, Hilma Nadzifa, Arfiana Arfiana

Bibliographic record

VenueMidwifery and Nursing Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMarriage and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFamily planningQuarter (Canadian coin)MedicinePopulationFamily medicineDemographyDeveloped countryData collectionGynecologyResearch methodologyEnvironmental healthGeographyStatisticsMathematicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The success of family planning programs in Indonesia is influenced by several factors, including socio-economic, cultural, educational, religious, and women's status. At the South Magelang Health Center in 2022, it can be seen that in the first Quarter of 2022 there are 31 acceptors, both new and old acceptors with types of contraceptive method users injection 21, IUD 7, and Implant 2 acceptors Methods: the type of quantitative research with survey methods and data collection time with a cross-sectional approach. The research instrument used a questionnaire. The population is 31 respondents with data analysis using Chie Square with alpha 5%. Results: Based on statistical tests, the results obtained: there is no relationship between economic level p: 0.158, maternal age with p: 0.131, number of children with p: 0.887, education level with p: 0.778, level of knowledge about contraception with p: 0.642 and family support with p: 0.776 with the use of contraceptives. Conclusion: extensive and detailed information about various contraceptives is carried out before a person chooses to use certain types of contraception and husband support is needed in determining the type of contraception.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.159
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.268 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMidwifery and Nursing ResearchSame topicMarriage and Family DynamicsFrench-language works237,207