Access to support services for individuals who experience intimate partner violence during stressful life events (SLEs) in high-income countries: Protocol for a scoping review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Women, gender minorities and their children are at heightened risk of intimate partner violence (IPV) following stressful life events (SLE). The increase in IPV during the global pandemic of the Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) is recent evidence. Studies have linked IPV to poor health, resulting in lower mental, physical, sexual, and reproductive health outcomes. IPV has also been shown as a barrier to labour force participation, leading to negative socioeconomic outcomes (i.e., low or no employment). Formal and informal supports help individuals who experience IPV, but it is unclear if and how these are being accessed during SLEs such as environmental disasters, pandemics, and economic recessions. Accessibility to programs is an issue in normal times because of stigma, social norms, and lack of knowledge; this has been further amplified by situations where individuals who experience violence are isolated physically and emotionally, as well as face controlling behaviours by their perpetrators of violence. This scoping review will be used to conduct a comprehensive review of literature and address the research question: What is known in published literature about access to services by individuals who experience IPV during stressful life events in high-income countries? METHODS: The following electronic databases will be searched for relevant publications: MEDILINE (OVID), Embase (OVID), PsychINfo (OVID), CINAHL (EBSCO), Global Health (EBSCO), Gender Watch (ProQuest), Web of Science and Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ProQuest). Key terms and medical subject headings (MeSH) will be based on previous literature and consult with an expert librarian. The major concepts include 'stressful life events' AND intimate partner violence' AND 'access to services'. Google, Google Scholar, and the WHO website will be used to search for grey literature, books/chapters, and programme reports as well as references of relevant reviews. Studies will be screened and extracted by two reviewers and conflicts resolved through discussion or a third reviewer. Both quantitative and qualitative analysis of relevant data will outline key findings. DISCUSSION: The scoping review will provide synthesized and summarized findings on literature regarding access to informal and formal social supports by victims of IPV during SLEs (i.e., pandemics and natural/environmental disasters/emergencies, economic recessions) where possible, highlighting key barriers, facilitators and lessons learned. Findings have potential to inform programs, policies, and interventions on accessibility to necessary support and health services during disasters.
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 | 0,043 | 0,050 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,005 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,016 | 0,017 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,018 | 0,015 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Communication savante | 0,008 | 0,008 |
| Science ouverte | 0,005 | 0,007 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,008 | 0,006 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,066 | 0,007 |
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 ».