Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 12 Documents
Search

Metabolic Risk Profile and Visual Function Among Ride-Hailing Drivers William Sayogo; Victor Setiawan Tandean; Minarni Wartiningsih; Christina Destri Wiwis Wijayanti; Eveline Yulia Darmadi
Eduvest - Journal of Universal Studies Vol. 6 No. 9 (2026): Eduvest - Journal of Universal Studies
Publisher : Green Publisher Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.59188/eduvest.v6i9.53509

Abstract

Fly ash- and pumice-based geopolymers have emerged as promising low-carbon construction materials with the potential to reduce the environmental impacts associated with Portland cement production. However, their performance is highly dependent on mixture proportions, particularly the liquid-to-solid (L/S) ratio. Therefore, this study aimed to identify the optimum L/S ratio and evaluate its influence on the characteristics of geopolymer mortar. A laboratory experimental program was conducted using five liquid-to-solid (L/S) ratios of 0.40, 0.45, 0.50, 0.55, and 0.60. The investigated properties included compressive strength, density, and water absorption. The statistical significance of the L/S ratio was evaluated using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). The L/S ratio significantly affected the compressive strength, density, and water absorption of geopolymer mortar. The optimum performance was achieved at an L/S ratio of 0.45, yielding the highest compressive strength (21.03 MPa), highest density (2.12 g/cm³), and lowest water absorption (6%). One-way ANOVA confirmed that variations in the L/S ratio had statistically significant effects on all investigated properties (p < 0.001), with coefficients of determination of 99.44% for compressive strength, 98.42% for density, and 75.04% for water absorption. The liquid-to-solid (L/S) ratio is a critical parameter governing matrix densification, porosity development, and the physical and mechanical properties of fly ash- and pumice-based geopolymer mortar. An L/S ratio of 0.45 is recommended as the optimum condition for achieving the best balance among compressive strength, density, and water absorption.
Analisis Perbandingan Hasil Diagnostik Sindroma Mata Kering Menggunakan Ocular Surface Disease Index dan Tear Break-Up Time Victor Setiawan Tandean; Hendrik Hanok Lenggu; Hanna Tabita Hasianna Silitonga
Antigen : Jurnal Kesehatan Masyarakat dan Ilmu Gizi Vol. 4 No. 4 (2026): November: Antigen: Jurnal Kesehatan Masyarakat dan Ilmu Gizi
Publisher : LPPM STIKES KESETIAKAWANAN SOSIAL INDONESIA

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.57213/antigen.v4i4.1258

Abstract

Dry Eye Disease (DED) is a multifactorial ocular surface disorder with complex clinical manifestations, requiring both subjective and objective assessments for accurate diagnosis. The Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) is widely used to evaluate subjective symptoms, whereas Tear Break-Up Time (TBUT) assesses tear film stability objectively. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic outcomes of DED using OSDI and TBUT. An analytical observational study with a cross-sectional design was conducted among 66 undergraduate students at Universitas Ciputra Surabaya selected through stratified random sampling. Data were collected using the OSDI questionnaire and TBUT examination with a slit-lamp microscope. Statistical analyses included the McNemar test, Cohen's Kappa coefficient, and diagnostic performance analysis using TBUT as the reference standard. The McNemar test demonstrated no significant difference in the proportion of DED diagnoses between OSDI and TBUT (p = 0.678). However, Cohen's Kappa revealed a very low level of agreement between the two methods (κ = -0.013; p = 0.913). Diagnostic performance analysis showed that OSDI had a sensitivity of 80.00%, specificity of 18.75%, positive predictive value of 75.47%, negative predictive value of 23.08%, and overall diagnostic accuracy of 65.15%. These findings indicate that OSDI has good sensitivity for identifying individuals with DED but limited ability to correctly identify individuals without the disease. Therefore, OSDI and TBUT should be considered complementary rather than interchangeable diagnostic tools to provide a more comprehensive evaluation of Dry Eye Disease, particularly in non-clinical populations.