Pengaruh Oral Motor Excersice terhadap Kesulitan Makan Anak Prasekolah di Kota Ambon
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Difficulty Eating difficulties in preschool children are challenges that can affect the growth, development, and health of children. One of the main causative factors is oral motor disorders that inhibit the child's ability to chew and swallow food. Oral Motor Exercise (OME) has been proposed as an effective intervention to improve eating skills by stimulating and training oral muscles. This study aims to analyze the effect of OME on eating difficulties in preschool children in Ambon City. The research method used a quasi-experiment with a pre-test and post-test design with a control group involving 30 preschool children divided into intervention and control groups. The intervention group received OME training for four weeks, while the control group only received education about healthy eating patterns. The Montreal Children's Hospital Feeding Scale (MCH-FS) measured eating difficulties before and after the intervention. The results showed that the intervention group experienced significant improvements in eating skills compared to the control group. This suggests that OME effectively improves oral motor coordination and reduces eating difficulties in preschool children. These findings support the integration of OME into pediatric nursing intervention programs and the development of public health policies related to the prevention of eating disorders in children.
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.
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 | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it