MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387376600 · doi:10.59934/jaiea.v3i1.289

Diagnosis of Baby Blues Syndrome sing the Certainty Factor Method (Case Study: FULL BETHESDA Hospital)

2023· article· en· W4387376600 on OpenAlexaff
Sulisni, Achmad Fauzi, Suci Ramadani

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Artificial Intelligence and Engineering Applications (JAIEA) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEdcuational Technology Systems
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBluesFeelingCertaintyMedicinePsychologyPsychiatryPediatricsSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Baby blues syndrome is a psychological disorder experienced by women after giving birth, such as feeling excessively upset and sad, and tired for no apparent reason. About 80% of women who have just given birth will experience Baby blues Syndrome, if this continues and is prolonged it will be very dangerous for the health of the mother and baby. From the problems above, the hospital needs to have an additional system that can help make it easier for the medical team to speed up handlers in analyzing and diagnosing Baby blues Syndrome suffered by patients using the certainty factor method. The purpose of this research is to build an expert system for diagnosing the symptoms of Baby blues syndrome using the certainty factor method. Based on the results of the CF calculation, the highest score is the type of baby blues syndrome with a value of 0.9602 or 96.02%. From the results obtained, the system identified that the patient had a type of baby blues syndrome.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designCase report
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 venueJournal of Artificial Intelligence and Engineering Applications (JAIEA)Same topicEdcuational Technology SystemsFrench-language works237,207