Taajamassa asuvien lapsiperheiden kotivara ja omatoiminen varautuminen
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective. The main purpose of this study is to examine what families with children living in urban areas think about self-preparedness and emergency food supply kits nowadays. Study shows how study subjects understand terms "emergency food supply kit" and "self-preparedness", what they think about their own emergency food supply kits and the necessity of it in urban areas. Furthermore study explains the pros and cons of the newest Kotivara-guide from family perspective. Previous studies have shown that there are too little researches about these topics and the fact that self-preparedness is becoming more common. Method. This was a qualitative research with phenomenographic features and which research data were collected using half structural thematic interviews. Nine families with children were selected for research and by change only women were interviewed. All families were living in Kiukainen. Transcribed research data were analyzed with content analysis. Results and conclusions. The term "emergency food supply kit" (kotivara) was more familiar than "self-preparedness" (omatoiminen varautuminen) and "emergency food supply kit" was typically only related to food storing. All families had subconsciously own emergency food supply kit that probably, however, lacked iodine pills, battery powered radio, cash money and water. Own emergency food supply kit was seen to have a major role in urban areas since it helps in exceptional situations and also in normal daily life. Electricity blackout was said to be the most typical exceptional situation nowadays. As for the findings about guidance, families suggested that the Kotivara-guide could be distributed in child health clinics, family centers and schools. According to research subjects, Kotivara-guide should also have the old guides about foods and other things to store. Based on the results of this research, Finnish emergency food supply kit guidance, Kotivara, is still important thing. In order to improve and be more familiar in Finland, informing should be more humane and targeted at those with the greatest needs.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.001 |
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.
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".