MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2218568487 · doi:10.18438/b85g6d

Availability of Library and Information Services for Rural Community Development in Nigeria: A Case Study of Ewatto, in Esan South East LGA of Edo State

2015· article· en· W2218568487 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jerome Idiegbeyan-Ose, Olalekan Abraham Adekunjo, Promise Ifeoma Ilo, Frederick E. Odion

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence Based Library and Information Practice · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Information Literacy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLocal government areaNewspaperState (computer science)Government (linguistics)Rural areaPoliticsService (business)GeographyEconomic growthThe InternetLibrary scienceSocioeconomicsLocal governmentPolitical scienceSociologyBusinessPublic administrationWorld Wide WebAdvertisingMarketingComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract
 
 Objective – This paper examines the availability of Library and Information Services in a rural community using as a case study the community of Ewatto in Esan South East Local Government Area of Edo State in Nigeria
 
 Methods – Questionnaires were distributed by hand in each of Ewatto’s eighteen villages. 
 
 Results – The survey found that the information needs of Ewatto rural dwellers are in the areas of health, occupation, politics, as well as family and education. Their major sources of information include town criers, oral information from neighbours and newspapers. The major challenges hindering information availability include absence of libraries and information service centres, lack of internet connectivity and poor attitude of rural extension workers.
 
 Conclusion – For any nation to develop maximally, rural communities must be provided with adequate, relevant, and up-to-date information, the authors recommend the establishment of a library and information centre in Ewatto.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.605
Threshold uncertainty score0.464

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.605
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence Based Library and Information PracticeSame topicLibrary Science and Information LiteracyFrench-language works237,207