Background: Globally, postpartum depression is one of the most common but often unrecognized complications of childbirth, yearly affecting about 10–15% of postnatal women. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of postpartum depression and its predictors among postnatal women in Lagos. Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted among 250 mothers in Eti-Osa Local Government Area of Lagos State, Nigeria, attending six Primary Health Care centers for infant immunization at six weeks post-delivery. Data was collected using a pretested semi-structured interviewer administered questionnaire which included the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale. Analysis was carried out using SPSS version 23TM. Chi-square and logistic regression analyses were used to determine associations and predictive relationships between various factors and the presence of postpartum depression. The level of significance was set at <0.05. Results: The prevalence of postpartum depression was 35.6%. Multiparity, delivery by cesarean section, mother being unwell after delivery, and not exclusively breastfeeding the baby were the factors linked with postpartum depression. Following multiple logistic regression, having postpartum blues (p=0.000; OR=32.77; 95%CI=7.23-148.58)., not getting help with caring for the baby (p=0.008; OR=2.64; 95%CI=1.29-5.42), experiencing intimate partner violence (p=0.000; OR=5.2; 95%CI=2.23-11.91) and having an unsupportive partner (p=0.018; OR=2.6; 95%CI=1.17-5.78) were identified as predic- tors of postpartum depression. Conclusion: This study revealed a high prevalence of postpartum depression, identifying both the obstetric and psycho- social predictors. Social support for women both in the pre- and postnatal periods and routine screening of women for postpartum depression should be encouraged for early detection and immediate intervention. Keywords: Postpartum depression; PPD; Eti-Osa; postnatal women; Lagos.

This study presents a validation report of the Lecturer's Teaching Assessment Scale (LTAS) developed for the assessment of lecturer's teaching effectiveness in Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria. It also examined the factor structure of the LTAS, its construct validity, and internal consistency reliability coefficients. The study adopted the survey research design. A total of 13,000 students that completed the LTAS online constituted the sample for the study. The 34-item LTAS was used to collect data for the study. Collected data were subjected to reliability and factor analyses. Results showed that the LTAS has two subscales -Attitude to Teaching and Lecture Presentation and Organisation. The LTAS was adjudged to possess construct validity, and it was established through experts' judgement. The results also revealed that the LTAS was reliable (Cronbach Alpha reliability coefficient of 0.985, Spearman Brown's Split-half reliability coefficient of 0.998 and Gutman's Split-half coefficient of 0.997). Thus, the LTAS possessed adequate psychometric qualities that make it suitable for use among Nigerian undergraduate students.Keywords: scaling; teaching assessment; validation; reliability analysis; lecturer's assessment IntroductionOver the years, the assessment of academic members of staff during annual review of lecturers in Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria has been largely subjective as there was no formal, reliable and valid evidence to substantiate the rating of the quality of teaching of academic staff by their respective Heads of Department. The university recently became determined to ensure that lecturers are more committed to working hard than it was in the past, sustain its good rating via webometric ranking among its pairs in Nigeria and on the continent of Africa (Webometric ranking is a site that provides ranking of universities across the world. The site started publishing the ranking of universities in 2004 and the criteria for making the ranking are available on the website at http://www.webometrics.info/) and ensure excellence in learning and culture by trying to put into use an evidence-based approach for the assessment of every lecturer at the end of every semester, with a view to ensuring that lecturers strive to deliver their instructions with all the seriousness and innovations capable of enhancing learning positively.It was in the light of the foregoing that the Lecturers Teaching Assessment Scale (LTAS) was introduced to students for the assessment of the quality of teaching of academic members of staff in Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria. The LTAS is due for completion online (via the university's electronic portal) at the end of lecture periods of every semester by students who might have finished at least the first semester of 200 level (i.e. first semester of Part Two). This decision was exemplified by the fact that Lecturers themselves (having the premonition that their activities will be subjected to this type of assessment at the end of the sem...

The study determined the parameter estimate of the Senior School Certificate Mathematics items of June/July 2017 NECO examinations and testlet effect under Multilevel Measurement Modeling with the aim of providing information on the psychometric properties and quality of the items. The research design was an ex-post facto, The examinees response were the multiple – choice items of the National Examinations Council Mathematics paper two for June/July 2017 which consisted the data for the study group. The targeted population consisted of 26,086 senior secondary three examinees who registered for Mathematics Senior School Certificate (NECO) in June/July 2017 in Osun State. A total of 318 private schools and 179 public schools registered for the paper. The results revealed the following items to be good which implied that such items functioned well, these were: items 1, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 26, 27, 28, 29, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 40, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 50, 51, 52, 54, 57, 58, 59, 60 whereas items that were considered to be bad included 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 13, 16, 19, 24, 25, 30, 38, 39, 41, 49, 53, 55 and 56. Furthermore, investigating an average bundle of item statistics under the measurement framework indicated that the Item Discrimination Means value and Standard Deviation under IRT approach were 1.26 and 0.60 respectively while the Mean value difference was 1.26. Although, item difficulty Mean value and the Standard Deviation were 0.26 and 4.26, respectively, whereas the Mean value difference was 0.26. Similarly, the guessing Mean value and the Standard Deviation were 0.15 and 0.19, respectively, whereas the Mean value difference stood at 0.15. The study concluded that any standardized examination, especially from an examining body in charge of certificate examination, if issues like differential testlet effect is not taking into consideration, it could harm the validity of the items and also alter the ability estimates of the examinees The validity of the test would be strengthened when issues like differential testlet effect is adequately taken care of.

This study examined the impact of publication bias on a meta-analysis of empirical studies on validity of University

Matriculation Examinations in Nigeria with a view to determine the level of difference between published and unpublished

articles. Specifically, the design was an ex-post facto, a causal comparative design. The sample size consisted of 30

empirical studies selected on the basis of empirical status and relevance. The characteristics of these studies were

recorded, coded and analyzed. The results revealed that the impact of publication bias was minimal on the meta-analysis

study since the two versions i.e. published and unpublished articles yielded essentially similar estimates of effect

sizes. (Mean Fisher =0.393, Weighted Fisher =0.398 with associated r =0.375 for both). Even though the use of non-

representative proportion of significant studies in the two positive directions led to a non-representative set of

studies, published articles had a higher effect size than the unpublished articles. ( = 0.460 for published, while =0.279

for unpublished). The effect size of published articles was significantly different from unpublished articles ( χ2=5.42 p

< 0.05 sig). This was an indication that studies with more significant results were the published. On the overall, there

was no significant difference in the level of significance for both published and unpublished articles ( χ2 = 0.0031 p >

0.05). Hence, publication bias did not affect the results of this meta-analysis.

No abstract