MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2914140529 · doi:10.29173/iasl7144

Information Needs and Library Services Delivery for Students with Visual Impairment in Oyo State, Nigeria

2018· article· en· W2914140529 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kolawole Akinjide Aramide, Wasiu Olayide Lawal, R.O Odunlade

Bibliographic record

VenueIASL Annual Conference Proceedings · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTactile and Sensory Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrailleVisual impairmentService delivery frameworkInformation needsService (business)Visually impairedMedical educationReading (process)MultimediaPsychologyComputer scienceLibrary scienceOptometryMedicineBusinessPolitical scienceMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated the information needs and library service delivery to students with visual impairment in Oyo State, Nigeria with a focus on assessing the influence of library 1 services; information needs; media formats availability and accessibility on library use among students with visual impairment in Oyo State, Nigeria. The study established educational information, health information and information on coping with their visual impairment as major information needs of the visually impaired students while circulation service, reference service and screen reading service on computers are found to be the only library services provided for them. Print Books/Magazines, Braille Books and Braille-in-Print were found to be prominent among the few media-formats available for the students while the dearth of media-formats was found to be inadequate in meeting the information needs of students with visual impairment in Oyo State. Lack of ease of accessing the library resources, facilities as well as library staff whenever they need help, poor policy on borrowing privileges, lack of path sounders to guide their movement around the library among others were major accessibility issues confronting the students in enjoying quality library services. The study recommended the need to address the provision of basic facilities that are critical to effective library service delivery to the visually impaired students.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.297
Threshold uncertainty score0.560

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.005
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.269 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIASL Annual Conference ProceedingsSame topicTactile and Sensory InteractionsFrench-language works237,207