MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Tackling Public Service Delivery Challenges Through Appropriate Work Ethics in Nigeria

2022· article· en· W4307407767 on OpenAlexaff
Mojisola E. Akinlade, D.E. Gberevbie, U. D. Abasilim

Bibliographic record

VenuePERSPEKTIF · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIslamic Finance and Banking Studies
Canadian institutionsSault College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsService delivery frameworkWork (physics)Service (business)Test (biology)Public sectorSample (material)BusinessPublic serviceProduct (mathematics)Public relationsPolitical scienceMarketingEngineeringLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study focuses not only on identifying the ethical challenges hindering public service delivery but to state how these challenges can be tackled to bring out the desired service delivery demanded by the citizens. Also, this studyproffer suggestions on the work ethics mechanisms that can be employed to enhance the service delivery. The Ekiti State University Teaching Hospital (EKSUTH), Ado-Ekiti, Nigeria was used as the study area and it adopted the cross-sectional survey research design. The primary source of data was obtained from the administration of questionnaires to both EKSUTH staff (administrative and clinical departments) and EKSUTH out-patients followed by an in-depth interview with four administrative and four clinical staff. The Pearson Product Moment Correlation, Linear Regression Analysis, and One Sample T-test Analysis were used to test the various hypotheses, and the study findings reveals that there is a link between work ethics and service delivery, also, a proper implementation of standard work ethics can lead to increased efficiency in the public sector. Based on these observations, the researcher suggests that EKSUTH Management should bring up strategical ways in improving the work ethics that would bring about the desired public service delivery.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.008
Scholarly communication0.0100.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePERSPEKTIFSame topicIslamic Finance and Banking StudiesFrench-language works237,207