STIGMATISING ATTITUDES TOWARDS PEERS WITH SICKLE CELL DISEASE AMONG SECONDARY SCHOOL STUDENTS IN NIGERIA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sickle cell disease (SCD) is a serious genetic blood disorder experienced by many young people in Nigeria, but the attitudes of students to peers with SCD is scarcely studied. We explored the stigmatising attitudes towards SCD among 370 secondary school students in Nigeria. The students completed questionnaires on attitude to SCD based on a modified Bogardus scale. A significant proportion of the students endorsed negative attitudes towards peers with SCD and showed poor knowledge of the condition. For example, only 41% thought most students would invite a peer with SCD to their birthday party; only 43% thought most students would like to study together with a peer with SCD; 30% believed spiritual and traditional healers can cure SCD; 11% believed that SCD is caused by evil spirits; 15% believed it can be caused by bad food; and 9% thought it is infectious. Regression analysis identified as significant predictors of negative attitudes these two factors: (a) having less personal contact with people affected by SCD, and (b) the belief that people with SCD cannot lead a normal life. Interventions to reduce negative attitudes towards victims of SCD among school children in Nigeria should include more exposure to people with SCD and positive information to challenge nihilistic beliefs about the condition.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".