MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Family quality of life in Nigeria

2011· article· en· W2144888480 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intellectual Disability Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDaughterQuality of life (healthcare)PsychologyFamily lifeQuality (philosophy)Government (linguistics)Educational attainmentGerontologyMedicineSociologySocioeconomicsEconomic growthPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The limited literature that exists about intellectual disabilities (ID) in Nigeria suggests that perceptions of ID may be shaped by social and cultural beliefs, and that socio-economic factors have prevented the development of policy and services. The present study sought to explore these suggestions in more detail by administering the Family Quality of Life Survey, an instrument used extensively throughout the world to collect comprehensive data on family quality of life. Its specific purposes were: (1) to describe the family quality of life of Nigerian families that have a son or daughter with ID and (2) to provide some initial ideas about the relationship between the families' life experiences and government policy and provision of services. METHOD: Eighty main caregivers from 80 families that received services for their sons and daughters with ID from two community agencies volunteered to participate. Two trained assistants administered the Family Quality of Life Survey in accordance with the administration methods set out by the Survey authors. Quantitative data and explanatory comments were also collected. RESULTS: Regarding the first study purpose, all nine life domains of the Family Quality of Life Survey were rated as important. The two main outcome measures, Attainment and Satisfaction, showed that three domains (Family relationships, Influence of values and Health) were sources of quality for families, but that three domains (Support from services, Support from others and Leisure) detracted from family quality of life. Measures of Opportunities, Initiative and Stability were somewhat related to one another, and with the two main outcome measures. Participants' explanatory comments suggested that the main caregivers perceived some domains to make their lives better and others did not. Regarding the second study purpose, it was only possible with the data available to make suggestions, but it seemed that there is a strong need for the development of government policy and services, and for education and training. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that some areas of family life contribute to quality of life for Nigerian families and other areas of life are problematic for families. Although this study is not representative of all Nigerian families that have a son or daughter with ID, it provides important initial information on the family experience with disability in Nigeria.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.440
GPT teacher head0.493
Teacher spread0.053 · 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