MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991665821 · doi:10.1177/0886260504267757

Intimate Partner Violence in the U.S. General Population

2005· review· en· W1991665821 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Interpersonal Violence · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism
KeywordsDomestic violenceHomicidePopulationPoison controlSuicide preventionCriminologyHuman factors and ergonomicsQuarter (Canadian coin)Injury preventionOccupational safety and healthPsychologyPolitical scienceMedicineMedical emergencyGeographyEnvironmental healthLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article reviews survey research on intimate partner violence (IPV) in the U.S. general population. Results from survey research conducted over the past quarter century are briefly summarized. Three additional national studies related to injuries, crime victimization, and homicide among intimate partners in the United States are also considered. The article emphasizes the progress that has been made in general population survey research related to IPV. It concludes with a discussion of the current controversies and future directions for survey research of IPV in the U.S. general population.

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.

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)0.004
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.354 · 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