Traditional Practices Applied to Maintenance of Mother During Pregnancy and Postpartum Period in Kars
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: This search has been done to determine the traditionalpractices at pregnancy and postpartum period which is applied to maintance of mother in Kars. Method: A total of 500 women attending in the obstetrics department of a hospital who had at least one living birth between January and April 2013 and accepting to participate in this study were included in this study. A questionnaire, prepared by the researcher, was used to collect data. Results: 70% of the women consider important to some traditional practices in different levels. It was determined that during their postpartum period 40% of women conducted traditional practices related to breastfeeding, 64% conducted traditional practicesrelated to puerperality, and 33.6% conducted traditional practices related to pregnancy. It has been determined the traditional practices at postpartum period which is applied to maintenance of mother as follows: making the forties of confi ned women (97.8%) and intercourse is forbidden the 40 days of confi ned women (98.7%) these applications have been found at the fi rst orders. Conclusion: It has been found that the women in the scope of the search consider maintenance some traditional practices to mother at pregnancy and the postpartum period. Women were educated about mother care in pregnancy and postpartum period by health personnel and training consistently and regularly informed about the wrong traditional practices is recommended.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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".