MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389151594 · doi:10.30604/jnf.v6i1.778

Hubungan Tinggi Badan Ibu dengan Kejadian Stunting di Wilayah Kerja Puskesmas Branti Raya Kabupaten Lampung Selatan Tahun 2022

2023· article· id· W4389151594 on OpenAlexaff
Yolanda Oktavia, Desti Ambar Wati, Abdullah, Alifiyanti Muharramah

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Gizi Aisyah · 2023
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldMedicine
TopicPublic Health and Nutrition
Canadian institutionsWiLAN (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGynecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stunting merupakan masalah kesehatan masyarakat yang berhubungan dengan peningkatan risiko morbiditas, mortalitas, dan hambatan pertumbuhan motorik dan mental. Prevalensi balita stunting nasional mengalami peningkatan dari 29,6% di tahun 2017 menjadi 30,8% di tahun 2018. Stunting dapat disebabkan tinggi badan ibu. Tujuan penelitian ini untuk mengetahui hubungan tinggi badan ibu dengan kejadian stunting di Wilayah Kerja Puskesmas Branti Raya Kabupaten Lampung Selatan Tahun 2022. Penelitian ini dilakukan pada bulan Desember. Jenis penelitian ini adalah kuantitatif dengan rancangan case control. Populasi dalam penelitain ini adalah anak usia 6-59 bulan dengan jumlah 3.364 balita dan ibu dengan balita usia 6-59 bulan yang mengalami stunting di Puskesmas Branti Raya sebesar 30 orang. Sampel dalam penelitain ini yaitu 30 orang kelompok kasus dan 30 orang kelompok kontrol. Analisis univariat menggunakan persentase (%), sedangkan analisis bivariat menggunakan chi square. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa pada kelompok kasus terdapat 16 (53,3%) responden dengan tinggi badan normal dan pada kelompok kasus terdapat 25 (83,3%) responden dengan tinggi badan normal. Hasil analisis bivariat didapatkan ada hubungan tinggi badan ibu (p-value= 0,026) dengan kejadian stunting. Diharapkan ibu dapat melakukan pengukuran tinggi badan anaknya secara rutin pada kegiatan posyandu tiap bulannya guna memantau status gizi TB/U anak secara teratur.

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)0.001
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 score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.120

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.004

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Gizi AisyahSame topicPublic Health and NutritionFrench-language works237,207