MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384570825 · doi:10.5114/fmpcr.2023.127674

Development of a web-based “Perineal Care Protocol” educational model as assistance for postpartum perineal wound care at home

2023· article· en· W4384570825 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bina Melvia Girsang, Eqlima Elfirae

Bibliographic record

VenueFamily Medicine & Primary Care Review · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicWound Healing and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversitas Sumatera Utara
KeywordsMedicineProtocol (science)Primary careWound careNursingFamily medicineAlternative medicineIntensive care medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

search, G -Funds CollectionBackground. 70% of cases where there is a tear in the perineal tissue at the time of delivery, either spontaneously or with an episiotomy, require perineal suture treatment.Postpartum mothers who experience a delivery with an episiotomy indicate that they experience a higher level of pain.Objectives.The educational model "Perineal Self Care Protocol" is an educational intervention model with a web-based application method for postpartum mothers at home.Material and methods.This research was conducted in the working area of the Medan Sunggal and Medan Amplas health centres with a sample size of 138 women who were divided into 2 groups, namely the intervention group (the Medan Sunggal working area) and the control group (the Medan Amplas work area).A sampling technique was carried out by purposive sampling with the aim of identifying self-efficacy assessment is done by "Perineal Self Care Protocol" education module for 4 consecutive days. Results.In the results of this research, there was an increase in postpartum mother's self-efficacy with a significance value of p < 0.005, where 10 items of self-efficacy that have been shown to increase with the development of education through the website have been found to increase.Conclusions.In the results of this research, there was an increase in postpartum mother's self-efficacy with a significance value of p < 0.005, where there were 10 items of self-efficacy components that were proven to increase with the development of education through the website.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.053
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.053
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.006

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFamily Medicine & Primary Care ReviewSame topicWound Healing and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207