MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417291789 · doi:10.31331/ijheco.v6i2.4266

Hubungan Pemberian ASI Eksklusif Dan Paparan Asap Rokok Dengan Status Gizi Baduta Di Kecamatan Muntilan Kabupaten Magelang

2025· article· W4417291789 on OpenAlexaff
Fauzia Liesly Anindya, Ruri Trisasri

Bibliographic record

VenueIndonesian Journal of Health Community · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicPublic Health and Nutrition
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOccupational exposureOccupational medicinePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Masalah gizi pada anak di bawah dua tahun (baduta) masih menjadi perhatian penting dalam kesehatan masyarakat di Indonesia. Penelitian memiliki tujuan yaitu menganalisis hubungan perilaku ibu—pemberian ASI eksklusif dan paparan asap rokok—dengan status gizi baduta usia 1–6 bulan di area kerja Kecamatan Muntilan, Kabupaten Magelang, tahun 2025. Penelitian menerapkan desain kuantitatif melalui pendekatan potong lintang (cross-sectional) dan diikuti 124 ibu serta 56 baduta yang dipilih melalui teknik purposive sampling. Data diperoleh melalui wawancara terstruktur dan pengukuran antropometri berdasarkan indikator berat badan berdasarkan usia (BB/U) dan panjang badan berdasarkan usia (PB/U) sesuai standar WHO 2006. Analisis data dilakukan secara univariat dalam menunjukkan distribusi frekuensi dan persentase setiap variabel. Hasil menunjukkan mayoritas ibu memberikan ASI eksklusif, sementara lebih dari separuh keluarga masih terpapar asap rokok. Mayoritas anak mempunyai status gizi normal, tetapi ditemukan sebagian kecil dengan gizi kurang dan berlebih. Hasil ini menegaskan bahwa pemberian ASI eksklusif dan lingkungan rumah tangga bebas asap rokok berperan penting dalam menjaga gizi anak. Diperlukan penguatan edukasi gizi dan intervensi lingkungan untuk mendukung pertumbuhan baduta yang sehat dan optimal.

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)0.000
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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.317 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIndonesian Journal of Health CommunitySame topicPublic Health and NutritionFrench-language works237,207