MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970657202 · doi:10.1300/j070v13n01_03

Measuring Child Sexual Abuse in Children and Youth

2004· review· en· W1970657202 on OpenAlexaff
Christine A. Walsh, Ellen Jamieson, Harriet L. MacMillan, Nico Trocmé

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Child Sexual Abuse · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMcMaster UniversityMcMaster Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChild sexual abuseSexual abuseStrengths and weaknessesChild abusePsychologyFace validityClinical psychologyReliability (semiconductor)Poison controlHuman factors and ergonomicsPsychometricsMedicineSocial psychologyMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Asking children and adolescents directly about their experience of sexual victimization overcomes some of the methodological weaknesses inherent in other approaches. Yet complex legal, ethical, and methodological issues remain. This paper reviews the psychometric properties of those questions or instruments that have measured exposure to child sexual abuse directly. A search of four electronic databases using descriptors "child sexual abuse" and "measurement" or "instrumentation" yielded four telephone administered tools, 13 face-to-face interviews, and 32 self-administered questionnaires. Few instruments had been subjected to rigorous evaluation. Establishing the validity and reliability of instruments measuring child sexual abuse and other forms of victimization are critical for the growth and expansion of the field.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations21
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Child Sexual AbuseSame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207