A Portrait of the Rights of Children With Disabilities in Nigeria: A Policy Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Worldwide, 200 million children experience disability, with the vast majority living in low and middle-income countries. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) places great importance on the rights of all children for the opportunities for survival, growth, health, and development. A subsequent document, the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) identifies children with disabilities as rights bearers, who should be considered in all policies and programming worldwide. Nigeria, in 1991 and 2010 ratified the CRC and the CRPD respectively. Nonetheless, knowledge of the extent to which their disability and child-directed policies are considered by these two key conventions remains limited. This study examined the extent to which Nigeria’s current disability and childhood policies have integrated the two normative frameworks from the UN. Using a structured search of databases and Nigerian federal and state government websites, we conducted a policy review to identify their disability and child-related disability policies. We also included the CRC and CRPD reports submitted by the Nigerian government to the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) (2008 & 2010 cyclical year). A thematic analysis, based on the CRC and CRPD report, identified the following six themes: participation, support systems, awareness-raising, factors associated with adherence to the CRC, laws & rights, and services. The review showed that the available Nigerian disability policies were federal, with some state policies which aligned with the CRC and CRPD. Also identified was the lack of disability policies specific to children and their families. We concluded that, to ensure proper inclusion of the rights of all children, including those with disabilities, in Nigeria there is a need for a more optimal uptake of recommendations of the CRC and CRPD as laid out by the UN.
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 | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.018 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".