MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7128025697 · doi:10.36743/jmhr.v4i01.946

Berat Badan Lahir, Panjang Badan Lahir, dan Jenis Kelamin Sebagai Faktor Kejadian Stunting di Provinsi Banten

2025· article· W7128025697 on OpenAlexaff
Dina Rodiah, Ismiyati Ismiyati, Yenie Wulandari, Kadar Kuswandi, Ida Lindawati

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Midwifery and Health Research · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldNursing
TopicChild Nutrition and Water Access
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpidemiologyUnder-fivePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stunting masih menjadi masalah kesehatan masyarakat utama di Indonesia meskipun prevalensinya menunjukkan penurunan secara bertahap. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis hubungan antara berat badan lahir, panjang badan lahir, dan jenis kelamin bayi dengan kejadian stunting pada balita di Provinsi Banten. Penelitian deskriptif kuantitatif ini menggunakan data sekunder Survei Status Gizi Indonesia (SSGI) tahun 2021 dengan jumlah sampel sebanyak 3.671 balita. Berat badan lahir diklasifikasikan menjadi berat badan lahir rendah dan normal, sedangkan panjang badan lahir dibedakan menjadi <48 cm dan ≥48 cm. Analisis data dilakukan menggunakan uji chi-square. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa berat badan lahir rendah berhubungan signifikan dengan kejadian stunting (p=0,001; OR=2,473). Balita dengan panjang badan lahir <48 cm memiliki risiko lebih tinggi mengalami stunting (p=0,001; OR=2,413). Selain itu, balita laki-laki lebih berisiko mengalami stunting dibandingkan perempuan (p=0,007; OR=1,238). Temuan ini menegaskan pentingnya peningkatan intervensi kesehatan ibu dan anak sejak masa kehamilan dan awal kehidupan untuk mencegah stunting.

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 score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.149

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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.169
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 venueJournal of Midwifery and Health Research→Same topicChild Nutrition and Water Access→French-language works237,207→