MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W121054016

A COMPARISON OF INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE IN MID-AND-OLD AGE: IS ELDER ABUSE SIMPLY A CASE OF SPOUSAL ABUSE GROWN OLD?

2010· dissertation· en· W121054016 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Yongjie Yon

Bibliographic record

VenueSummit (Simon Fraser University) · 2010
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicElder Abuse and Neglect
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaSimon Fraser UniversityHuman Resources and Skills Development CanadaKwantlen Polytechnic University
KeywordsElder abuseDomestic violencePsychologyCriminologyMedical emergencyMedicinePsychiatrySuicide preventionPoison control
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study used a national pooled dataset from the 1999 and 2004 Canadian General Social Surveys (GSS) to compare spousal abuse between mid-age adults (45-59 years) and older adults (>60 years). Two types of abuse: emotional/financial and physical/sexual are investigated. Three regression models on personal, relationship and environmental explanatory factors are examined to determine salient predictors of spousal abuse for each age group. Both similarities and differences were uncovered across the age groups. In general, the differences reflect the complexities of an aging population indicating the importance of social network, such as participation in social activities and community size. In addition, disability status and spousal drinking habits for both age groups were found to be associated with abuse. This study is first of its kind to examine spousal abuse among younger and older populations on the national level. The findings have implications for intervention programs for abused victims.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.878
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.284 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSummit (Simon Fraser University)Same topicElder Abuse and NeglectFrench-language works237,207