MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W98319450 · doi:10.18357/ijcyfs34201211485

THE BABY DUMPING PHENOMENON IN NIGERIA: A STUDY ON THE PERCEPTION OF MARKET WOMEN IN IBADAN

2012· article· en· W98319450 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Usman Adekunle Ojedokun, Ewere Nelson Atoi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family Studies · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHomicide, Infanticide, and Child Abuse
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhenomenonDumpingSpan (engineering)Style (visual arts)PerceptionPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyMedicineSocial psychologyGeographyEngineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p><span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: small;">Baby dumping is one of the most common forms of child abuse in Nigeria. Although this practice is not new, its current frequent occurrence and the negative implications it has on the babies concerned, however, makes it a serious social problem that requires urgent attention. Against this background, this paper examines the patterns, causes, and consequences<span style="color: #ff0000;"> </span>of the baby-dumping phenomenon in Nigeria. One hundred (100) market women involved in the study were selected through a quota sampling technique. In-depth interview and focus group discussion were the methods employed for data collection. Data interpretation was done through content analysis and ethnographic summaries. <span style="color: #000000;">Findings showed that the phenomenon of baby dumping is complex in nature</span>: Multiple factors were identified as responsible for its occurrence and it was recognized to have a wide range of social and health implications on the dumped babies. This study advocates for an urgent shift from the current reactive approach to more proactive planning to effectively curtail the problem.</span></p>

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.209

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.278 · 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.

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

Citations12
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family StudiesSame topicHomicide, Infanticide, and Child AbuseFrench-language works237,207