MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3038120656 · doi:10.1097/01.ogx.0000472553.18032.62

Efficacy of a Sexual Assault Resistance Program for University Women

2015· article· en· W3038120656 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Charlene Y. Senn, Misha Eliasziw, Paula C. Barata, Wilfreda E. Thurston, Ian R. Newby‐Clark, H. Lorraine Radtke, Karen L. Hobden

Notice bibliographique

RevueObstetrical & Gynecological Survey · 2015
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueSexual Assault and Victimization Studies
Établissements canadiensUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Windsor
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineSexual assaultResistance (ecology)Incidence (geometry)Intervention (counseling)Randomized controlled trialUnit (ring theory)Family medicineSuicide preventionPoison controlPsychiatryMedical emergencyPsychologySurgery

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

There is substantial risk among young women attending universities of being sexually assaulted. Over the 4 years of college, the incidence of sexual assault is estimated to be between 20% and 25% and highest during the first 2 years. There has been increasing public awareness of this problem in Canada and in the United States. Universities have faced heightened pressure to develop programs to educate students about sexual assault. Most campus programs currently used, however, have never been formally evaluated or have not been effective in reducing the incidence of sexual assault. Studies evaluating the effectiveness of workshops and other campus programs to help women resist sexual assault or reduce their risk have had inconsistent effects due to deficiencies in design and other problems. Some of these studies showed short-term benefit, but other studies showed no clear benefits at 2, 4, or 6 months. The aim of this open-label, randomized, controlled trial was to determine whether a new, 4-unit, small-group sexual assault resistance program could reduce the 1-year incidence of completed rape among first-year female university students. The study was conducted at 3 universities in Canada from September 2011 to February 2013. First-year female students were randomized to either the Enhanced Assess, Acknowledge, Act Sexual Assault Resistance program (resistance group) or to a control group provided access to brochures on sexual assault. Eligible students had to attend 1 of 4 scheduled sets of intervention sessions during the semester in which they enrolled in the study. The goal of the resistance program was to provide students with the ability to assess risk from acquaintances, overcome emotional barriers in acknowledging danger, and use effective verbal and physical self-defense. Women in the resistance group participated in a 4-unit sexual assault resistance program in which appropriate information was given, and skills taught and practiced. Those in the control group had access to brochures on sexual assault that were available in campus clinics and counseling centers. The primary outcome measure was completed rape and was measured by the Sexual Experiences Survey–Short Form Victimization, during 1 year of follow-up. A total of 893 women were randomized to 1 of 2 groups; 451 were assigned to the resistance group and 442 to the control group. Adherence in the resistance group was high; 91% attended at least 3 of the 4 units. The 1-year risk of completed rape was reduced by nearly 50% in the resistance group compared with the control group: 5.2% versus 9.8%; the relative risk reduction was 46.3%, with a 95% confidence interval of 6.8–69.1; P = 0.02. The incidence of attempted rape was reduced from 9.3% in the control group to 3.4% in the resistance group (relative risk reduction, 63.2%; P < 0.001). These data show that a rigorously designed and executed sexual assault resistance program was successful in substantially reducing the occurrence of rape, attempted rape, and other forms of victimization among first-year university women.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,041
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,399
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,967

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,041
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,129
Tête enseignante GPT0,368
Écart entre enseignants0,239 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations3
Publié2015
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueObstetrical & Gynecological SurveyMême sujetSexual Assault and Victimization StudiesTravaux en français237 207