MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7135104968 · doi:10.66109/jid.vi.17

Kesehatan Mental dalam Dunia Kerja : Tantangan dan Tanggung Jawab Negara Menuju Indonesia Emas 2045

2024· article· W7135104968 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Arlene Eleanor

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Identitas · 2024
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMental Health and Well-being
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultidisciplinary approachPsychosocialMental healthSocial securityWork (physics)Public policySocial policyPublic health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mental health has emerged as a strategic issue in global employment, particularly amid rising work demands and post-pandemic social transformation. In Indonesia, the existing labor regulatory framework does not explicitly address psychosocial risks in the workplace, despite growing psychological burdens among young workers, especially Generation Z. This article examines the integration of mental health into national labor policy through a multidisciplinary lens. It analyzes historical developments, theoretical frameworks such as the Job Demands- Resources Model and Psychosocial Safety Climate, and policy practices from countries including Japan, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia. Based on empirical and comparative insights, the article proposes four strategic pillars: regulatory harmonization, social security reform, primary care capacity-building, and multi-stakeholder collaboration with public literacy initiatives. The conclusion emphasizes the critical need to embed mental health in employment systems as a strategic prerequisite to realizing Indonesia’s Vision 2045 and enhancing the competitiveness of its workforce.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal IdentitasSame topicMental Health and Well-beingFrench-language works237,207