MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389052048 · doi:10.37058/jkki.v18i2.5612

ANALISIS PERILAKU POLA MAKAN PENDERITA DIABETES MELLITUS TIPE II DI WILAYAH KERJA UPTD PUSKESMAS KAWALI TAHUN 2021 (Implementasi teori Health Believe Model)

2022· article· id· W4389052048 on OpenAlexaff
Nilam Nur Padmi, Rian Arie Gustaman, Sri Maywati

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Kesehatan Komunitas Indonesia · 2022
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldMedicine
TopicPublic Health and Nutrition
Canadian institutionsWiLAN (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGynecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wilayah Asia Tenggara menempati peringkat ke-3 dengan prevalensi sebesar 11,3% dengan Indonesia sendiri berada diperingkat ke-7 diantara 10 negera dengan jumlah penderita Diabetes Mellitus terbanyak, yaitu sebesar 10,7 juta. Salah satu faktor masalah pada penanggulangan DM adalah ketidaktahuan penderita Diabetes Mellitus terkait pola makan yang dapat menyebabkan peningkatan kadar gula dalam darah. Tujuan: Untuk menganalisis serta mengetahui bagaimana perilaku pola makan penderita Diabetes Mellitus tipe II di Wilayah Kerja UPTD Puskesmas Kawali. Metode: Metode yang digunakandalam penelitian ini adalah metode kualitatif deskriptif. Peneliti menggunakan 12 informan yang terdiri dari 5 orang penderita DM, 5 orang keluarga penderita DM dan 2 orang Tenaga Kesehatan UPTD Puskesmas Kawali. Teknik pengumpulan data dilakukan dengan cara wawancara mandalam. Hasil: Pola Makan penderita DM di Wilayah Kerja UPTD Puskesmas Kawali belum sepenuhnya sesuai dengan prinsip pola makan 3J. Perceived Barriers penderita DM cenderung tinggi jika melakukan pola makan sesuai dengan prinsip 3J. Cues to Action penderita DM sebagian diperoleh dari dukungan keluarga terdekat.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.002

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Kesehatan Komunitas IndonesiaSame topicPublic Health and NutritionFrench-language works237,207