MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390365926 · doi:10.18280/ijsdp.181232

Impact of Labor and Health on Economic Growth in Indonesia During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Panel Data Regression Analysis

2023· article· en· W4390365926 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Eko Wahyu Nugrahadi, Indra Maipita, Nasrullah Hidayat, Muammar Rinaldi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Panel data2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Regression analysisEconomicsEconometricsVirologyStatisticsMedicineMathematicsInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this research is to explore the influence of labor force and health on Indonesia's economic growth amidst the COVID-19 pandemic.Employing time series data from 2018 to 2022, alongside cross-sectional data from all Indonesian provinces, the study utilizes Panel Data Regression Analysis as its primary method of investigation.This study's findings explain the t-count value of the labor variable of 4.925582 and the value of Prob.0.0000 (p-value 0.05), indicating that there is a positive influence of labor force (x) on economic growth (y) throughout the era of COVID-19.From formulation via the regression equation 𝑌 𝑡=𝑎+𝑥 𝑖 𝛽+𝜀 𝑡 found that economic growth = (-22.36519)+ 0.736771 labour -0.139982 health + e.It's showed that labor force has a positive impact on economic development, whereas health has a negative impact on economic growth.The f-test results in this analysis show that the fstatistical value is 2.352373 and the probability is 0.000257 (p 5%), implying that the Fixed Effect estimate, an independent variable consisting of labor and health combined, has a significant impact on Indonesian economic growth.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning→Same topicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts→French-language works237,207→