Ageing in displacement and gaps in support: support for older people in protracted displacement in New-Kuchingoro IDP camp, Abuja, Nigeria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This study aimed at exploring support for older people in protracted displacement in Nigeria, emphasising the available support and the gap in the support provided to them. Design/methodology/approach Qualitative interviews were used to collect data from ten displaced older people in New-Kuchingoro internally displaced persons (IDP) camp Abuja, Nigeria. The collected data were analysed thematically with NVivo 12. Findings Results show that older people received material, emotional and psychological supports from their families, neighbours, friends, religious organisations and non-governmental organisations. Several gaps were identified in the support provided to displaced older people. For example, their special nutritional or medical needs were neglected, and their support was primarily material, sporadic and spontaneous, as there is no existing framework guiding the care and support of older people in displacement. Research limitations/implications This study provides a foundation for further research on older people in displacement, an area that has received minimal scholarly attention. Practical implications The paper recommends that researchers and displaced persons’ care providers should pay more attention to the peculiar support needs of this less visible vulnerable group and adopt the internal displacement policy for the long-term protection of older people in displacement. Originality/value Older people in displacement remain less visible as humanitarian aid programmes and research focus more on women and children. This lack of attention may put older people in displacement at more risk as their peculiar needs may not be met. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to examine the gap in support for older people in displacement in Nigeria.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".