ANALISIS PERILAKU POLA MAKAN PENDERITA DIABETES MELLITUS TIPE II DI WILAYAH KERJA UPTD PUSKESMAS KAWALI TAHUN 2021 (Implementasi teori Health Believe Model)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".