Knowledge and Practice level regrading Prevention and Nutritional Management of Hepatitis B among Blood Donors in some Selected Territory Hospital of Dhaka City Bangladesh
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Infection with the hepatitis B virus (HBV) is a global problem. The World Health Organization (WHO) reports that 240 million people worldwide—or one in thirty—have a chronic HBV infection, accounting for around one-third of all entities who have ever contracted the virus. The knowledge and practices of blood donors with regard to HBV are not well understood. Thus, the purpose of the study was to evaluate blood donors' knowledge and practices concerning nutritional management in relation to HBV. Using a straightforward sample technique and semi-structured questionnaires, 120 blood donors participated in face-to-face interviews for the cross-sectional study. Using a straightforward sample technique and semi-structured questionnaires, 120 blood donors participated in face-to-face interviews for the cross-sectional study. The data was analyzed using a variety of statistical procedures, such as t-tests, Pearson Chi-square tests, and frequency distributions. The participants' average age was 34.5 years, with the majority being female (83%), and most being between the ages of 31 and 40 (50.0%). According to this study, 56.7% of retailers showed good practices regarding HBV, and 25.0% had strong knowledge. One-way ANOVA and the independent sample t-test showed that blood donors from rural areas knew considerably more about HBV [0.80 (0.79-0.82) versus 0.78 (0.77-0.79)]; p=0.001. Likewise, the [mean] practice score for females was 0.81 (0.77-0.85) as opposed to 0.70 (0.59-0.81); p=0.02. And Muslim nurses [p=0.035] [0.89(0.76-0.93) against 0.79(0.61-0.87)] faiths has significantly higher positive and good practice management compared to their counterparts.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".