MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031298931 · doi:10.2106/jbjs.g.01188

(Mis)Perceptions About Intimate Partner Violence in Women Presenting for Orthopaedic Care: A Survey of Canadian Orthopaedic Surgeons

2008· article· en· W2031298931 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Joint Surgery · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDomestic violenceMedicineFamily medicineOrthopedic surgerySuicide preventionInjury preventionPoison controlOccupational safety and healthHuman factors and ergonomicsPsychiatryMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Domestic violence is the most common cause of nonfatal injury to women in North America. In a review of 144 such injuries, the second most common manifestation of intimate partner violence was musculoskeletal injuries (28%). The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons is explicit that orthopaedic surgeons should play a role in the screening and appropriate identification of victims. We aimed to identify the perceptions, attitudes, and knowledge of Canadian orthopaedic surgeons with regard to intimate partner violence. METHODS: We surveyed members of the Canadian Orthopaedic Association to identify attitudes toward intimate partner violence. With use of a systematic random sample, 362 surgeons were mailed questionnaires. The questionnaire consisted of three sections: (1) the general attitude of the orthopaedic surgeon toward intimate partner violence, (2) the attitude of the orthopaedic surgeon toward victims and batterers, and (3) the clinical relevance of intimate partner violence in orthopaedic surgery. Up to three follow-up mailings were performed to enhance response rates. RESULTS: A total of 186 orthopaedic surgeons responded (a response rate of 51%), and 167 (91%) of them were men. Most orthopaedic surgeons (95%) estimated that <10% of their patients were victims of intimate partner violence, and most respondents (80%) believed that it was exceedingly rare (a prevalence of <1%). The concept of mandatory screening for intimate partner violence was met with uncertainty by 116 surgeons (64%). Misconceptions were perpetuated by surgeons who believed that inquiring about intimate partner violence was an invasion of the victim's privacy, that investigating intimate partner violence was not part of their duty, that victims choose to be a victim, and that victims play a proactive role in causing their abuse. By the completion of the survey, the majority of surgeons (91%) believed that knowledge about intimate partner violence was relevant to their surgical practice. CONCLUSIONS: Discomfort with the issue and lack of education have led to misconceptions among Canadian orthopaedic surgeons about intimate partner violence. The relevance of intimate partner violence to surgical practice is well understood, but studies regarding its prevalence are needed as a first step to change the current paradigm in orthopaedic surgery.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.105
Threshold uncertainty score0.930

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.246 · 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