Development of a web-based “Perineal Care Protocol” educational model as assistance for postpartum perineal wound care at home
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AMA Girsang B, Elfirae E. Development of a web-based “Perineal Care Protocol” educational model as assistance for postpartum perineal wound care at home. Family Medicine & Primary Care Review. 2023;25(2):160-164. doi:10.5114/fmpcr.2023.127674. APA Girsang, B., & Elfirae, E. (2023). Development of a web-based “Perineal Care Protocol” educational model as assistance for postpartum perineal wound care at home. Family Medicine & Primary Care Review, 25(2), 160-164. https://doi.org/10.5114/fmpcr.2023.127674 Chicago Girsang, Bina Melvia, and Eqlima Elfirae. 2023. "Development of a web-based “Perineal Care Protocol” educational model as assistance for postpartum perineal wound care at home". Family Medicine & Primary Care Review 25 (2): 160-164. doi:10.5114/fmpcr.2023.127674. Harvard Girsang, B., and Elfirae, E. (2023). Development of a web-based “Perineal Care Protocol” educational model as assistance for postpartum perineal wound care at home. Family Medicine & Primary Care Review, 25(2), pp.160-164. https://doi.org/10.5114/fmpcr.2023.127674 MLA Girsang, Bina Melvia et al. "Development of a web-based “Perineal Care Protocol” educational model as assistance for postpartum perineal wound care at home." Family Medicine & Primary Care Review, vol. 25, no. 2, 2023, pp. 160-164. doi:10.5114/fmpcr.2023.127674. Vancouver Girsang B, Elfirae E. Development of a web-based “Perineal Care Protocol” educational model as assistance for postpartum perineal wound care at home. Family Medicine & Primary Care Review. 2023;25(2):160-164. doi:10.5114/fmpcr.2023.127674.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".