MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999730320 · doi:10.1177/2158244019900567

Cloak of Invisibility: A Literature Review of Physical Disability in Ghana

2020· review· en· W2999730320 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

VenueSAGE Open · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Rights and Representation
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInvisibilityOppressionScholarshipInclusion (mineral)Disability studiesMedical model of disabilityPhysical disabilityPsychologyPublic relationsSociologyPolitical scienceGender studiesPoliticsPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This literature review surveys the state of current scholarship on physical disability in Ghana. The intention is to identify major themes and opinions relating to the challenges faced by Ghanaians with physical disabilities. After an extensive literature review, the authors selected 21 articles for inclusion based on the criteria that they had to focus on physical disability in a Ghanaian setting. Reviewing the articles revealed that most scholars have focused on the pervasive oppression of Ghanaians with physical disabilities. Six major topic areas emerged, including the experience of the disability rights movement from the 1990s to the present, the public perception of people with physical disabilities, the issue of families and abuse, the rights to education, challenges around employment and finances, and health care for disabled Ghanaians. This literature review presents these topics, discusses their implications, and makes suggestions for further research and action to improve human rights for Ghanaians with physical disabilities.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.864
Threshold uncertainty score0.564

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.384 · 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