Social work interventions on intimate partner violence against women in China
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
Summary Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) affects approximately one-fifth of women during their lifetime in China. However, limited studies have been conducted in China among women and service providers on IPV. The study reported in this article used an Ecological Model and the Capabilities Perspective integrated with the Advocacy Intervention Model as the theoretical framework for guiding the research and data analysis. This study was part of a participatory project to develop appropriate social work interventions in Guangzhou, China. Findings Twenty-one women who experienced IPV and 30 service providers were interviewed for their views on barriers to help-seeking processes, needs and concerns of this population, and recommendations for any changes. The results of this study clearly suggest that gender inequality is the root cause of IPV against women and prevents women from leaving a violent relationship. Applications The results suggest a number of needed changes at micro, meso, exo, and macro levels and the ways in which social workers can act as advocates for the changes in the context of Guangzhou.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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