Toward Evidence-Based Practice with Domestic Violence Perpetrators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review examines the policy and practice of interventions with male perpetrators of domestic violence in light of the widely accepted principles of evidence-based practice. Thus far, these policies and practices have enjoyed immunity from the external, empirical accountability available through implementing the findings from evaluations research and other empirical practice analyses. This immunity is supported by a policy framework where, for example, the state certifying agencies may presumptively forbid methods of intervention, with no obligation to empirically assess their efficacy or safety, that contradict the approved model. Based on the review of findings from both explanatory research and interventions research, evidence-based recommendations for policy and program change are proposed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.434 | 0.579 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.010 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.014 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".