Family and Domestic Violence Priority Setting Partnership Project Report
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The top ten priorities established for future research in family and domestic violence:1. Law, courts and violence restraining orders• What are the barriers to victims in the legal and court process (including adequate representation, court processes, attitudes of magistrates and lawyers, time limitations, relevance of laws, professional silos, review processes)?• What support is available in the court process for victims of family and domestic violence and how could this be improved? Police• How can police better respond to the needs of victims (e.g.Violence Restraining Orders, responses and breaches, training, incident reports, collaboration with human services, handover issues)?3. Non-physical abuse• How do we educate frontline service providers about non-physical abuse and best support clients (not exposed to physical/sexual violence)?• How do we educate the community to recognise non-physical violence as a form of family and domestic violence?• How do women experiencing non-physical violence recognise this as a form of family and domestic violence and access support? Prevention and early intervention*• Are there warning signs that a relationship could result in family and domestic violence?• Are there warning signs that a potential partner could become a perpetrator of family and domestic violence?• What educational strategies could be used to reduce family and domestic violence?• What policies could be implemented to reduce the issues associated with the perpetration of family and domestic violence? Impact on children• What are the long-term psychological effects for children who have been exposed to family and domestic violence?• How do we support children to overcome the effects of exposure to family and domestic violence?6. Mental health issues/outcomes• What are the psychological health effects for adults who have experienced family and domestic violence?• How can we support recovery after family and domestic violence?7. Service delivery• How can services be more accessible, relevant, innovative and culturally appropriate to support a diverse range of victims?• How is the development of services informed by the lived experience? 8. Financial issues• How can we support victims to overcome financial issues associated with family and domestic violence (e.g.Legal Aid/ legal fees, ongoing financial support, relocation costs, living costs, access to ongoing psychological services, work restrictions)?• How can we support victims to overcome financial barriers to leaving a family and domestic violence situation?9. Intergenerational impact and outcomes in family and domestic violence• New theme 10.Perpetrators• What factors are associated with perpetrators of family and domestic violence and how can these be reduced?* Theme expanded at the workshop's final session to include 'early intervention'
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,022 | 0,022 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,008 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,048 | 0,013 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».