Proyek Inovasi Efektivitas Lilin Aromaterapi Lavender terhadap Kecemasan pada Pasien Pre-Operasi
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Preoperative anxiety is a common problem experienced by patients and can affect physical and psychological preparedness before surgery. This condition needs to be addressed through effective and safe approaches, including non-pharmacological interventions such as aromatherapy. Objective: This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of lavender aromatherapy candles in reducing anxiety in preoperative patients. Methods: The study used a quasi-experimental design with a pre-post test approach without control and involved 20 patients who met the inclusion criteria. Anxiety levels were measured before and after the intervention using a standard instrument suitable for assessing preoperative anxiety. Lavender aromatherapy candles were lit for the predetermined duration of the intervention to provide stable aroma exposure. Results: The results showed a significant decrease in the distribution of anxiety levels after the intervention. The moderate anxiety category decreased from 75% to 15%, and the severe anxiety category decreased from 10% to 0%. Conversely, the non-anxious category increased from 0% to 20%, and the mild anxiety category increased to 65%. Conclusions: These findings indicate that lavender aromatherapy candles provide a significant relaxation effect on preoperative anxiety. The study concluded that lavender aromatherapy candles were effective as a complementary intervention to reduce anxiety and could be applied in pre-surgical nursing services.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".