MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Recognizing the co-occurrence of domestic and child abuse: a comparison of community- and hospital-based midwives

2009· article· en· W2128809778 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anne Lazenbatt, Margaret E.M Thompson-Cree

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth & Social Care in the Community · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineQuarter (Canadian coin)Community hospitalFamily medicineDescriptive statisticsNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to compare and contrast how midwives working in either hospital or community settings are currently responding to the co-occurrence of domestic and child abuse (CA), their perceived role and willingness to identify abuse, record keeping, reporting of suspected or definite cases of CA and training received. A survey questionnaire was sent to 861 hospital and community midwives throughout Northern Ireland which resulted in 488 midwives completing the questionnaire, leading to a 57% response rate. Comparisons were made using descriptive statistics and cross-tabulation, and the questionnaire was validated using exploratory factor analysis. Community midwives reported receiving more training on domestic and CA. Although a high percent of both hospital and community midwives acknowledged a link between domestic violence (DV) and CA, it was the community midwives who encountered more suspected and definite (P < 0.001) cases of CA. More community midwives reported to be aware of the mechanisms for reporting CA. However, an important finding is that although 12% of community midwives encountered a definite case of CA, only 2% reported the abuse, leaving a 10% gap between reporting and identifying definite cases of CA. Findings suggest that lack of education and training was a problem as only a quarter of hospital-based midwives reported to have received training on DV and 40% on CA. This was significantly less than that received by community midwives, as 57% received training on DV, and 62% on CA. The study suggests that midwives need training on how to interact with abused mothers using non-coercive, supportive and empowering mechanisms. Many women may not spontaneously disclose the issues of child or domestic abuse in their lives, but often respond honestly to a sensitively asked question. This issue is important as only 13% of the sample actually asked a woman a direct question about DV.

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)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.348 · 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 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

Citations19
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth & Social Care in the CommunitySame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207