Gray, black, and blue: the state of research and intervention for intimate partner abuse among elders
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Though not as common as in younger populations, intimate partner abuse (IPA) among elders is a significant and often overlooked problem. In this article, we focus on problems for research and intervention. We begin with a brief review of the phenomena of elder abuse and IPA, highlighting problems resulting from definitional issues and inconsistencies in research methodology. The balance of the paper comprises a discussion of problems for intervention. Drawing from the IPA and elder abuse literatures, risk factors unique to IPA among elders are presented, and limitations of existing screening and risk assessment instruments for use within this context are identified. The focus then shifts to legal considerations when working with elders who have experienced or perpetrated IPA. Our goals are to synthesize the elder abuse and IPA literatures, identify limitations within both, and to reflect upon the state of knowledge regarding IPA among elders.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it