MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380433921 · doi:10.21428/3d48c34a.93789f4d

Policy, Ethics and drama-based Research in Psychiatric Hospitals in Kano

2023· article· en· W4380433921 on OpenAlexaff
Lanre Qasim Adenekan, Taiwo Afolabi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Quality and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDramaKano modelPsychologyPsychiatrySociologyBusinessArtLiteratureMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines how the Nigeria mental health policy and ethics affect the conduct of drama-based research in psychiatric hospitals in Kano. This research becomes apposite with the endemic nature of mental health cases like substance abuse and substance use disorder in the country. The 2019 United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) survey reports that 14.3 million Nigerians suffer from substance use and abuse, and this figure constitutes a significant proportion of the World Health Organisation report that one in every four Nigerians (an average of 50 million) are challenged with a mental health condition. Using participant observation, questionnaire and key informant interview, the paper explores the knowledge of mental health practitioners about policies on mental health in Nigeria with a view to understanding how it affects their ethical practices and attitudes towards multidisciplinary research like dramatherapy with patients of substance use disorder. Findings from this research is significant for the realisation of best practices in engaging creative and artistic practices in providing care for people with mental health crisis like substance use disorder.

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)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0200.031
Scholarly communication0.0150.005
Open science0.0010.010
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.575
GPT teacher head0.654
Teacher spread0.079 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHealthcare Quality and ManagementFrench-language works237,207