MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414855743 · doi:10.1177/2752535x251384511

Experience of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Rural Nigeria: A Scoping Review of the Literature Contextualized With Local Knowledge Using Fuzzy Cognitive Mapping

2025· review· en· W4414855743 on OpenAlexaff
Mona Ziba Ghadirian, Iván Sarmiento, Natalia Reinoso Chávez, Neil Andersson, Anne Cockcroft

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunity Health Equity Research & Policy · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStakeholderPandemicMental healthRural areaCognitionNarrativeStakeholder engagementMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AimCollate and summarise published evidence of the non-clinical effects of the COVID-19 pandemic in rural Nigeria and compare the findings with community stakeholder experiences.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Scopus, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) for peer-reviewed papers published up to January 2024. Included studies used quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods to examine the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on the lives of rural Nigerians. Two reviewers conducted title, abstract, and full-text screening independently. We used narrative descriptions and fuzzy cognitive maps to summarise the findings of the review and compared the maps with those previously created by stakeholders in rural communities in Bauchi State, rural Nigeria.ResultsPoverty, hunger and lack of food, and stress and mental health problems were leading themes in both the literature and stakeholder maps. Stakeholder maps highlighted job loss and household conflicts. These topics were rarely explored in the literature, which emphasized reduced health services.ConclusionThis review and stakeholder perspectives confirm the importance of non-clinical impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic in rural Nigeria. Some issues highlighted by local community stakeholders were absent in the literature. Contextualizing published research with local experience provides specific insights to inform recovery policies.

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 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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0000.005
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 head0.512
GPT teacher head0.574
Teacher spread0.061 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunity Health Equity Research & PolicySame topicCOVID-19 Pandemic ImpactsFrench-language works237,207