Prevalence of Abuse and Violence Before, During, and After Pregnancy in a National Sample of Canadian Women
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
OBJECTIVES: We describe the prevalence of abuse before, during, and after pregnancy among a national population-based sample of Canadian new mothers. METHODS: We estimated prevalence, frequency, and timing of physical and sexual abuse, identified category of perpetrator, and examined the distribution of abuse by social and demographic characteristics in a weighted sample of 76,500 (unweighted sample = 6421) Canadian mothers interviewed postpartum for the Maternity Experiences Survey (2006-2007). RESULTS: Prevalence of any abuse in the 2 years before the interviews was 10.9% (6% before pregnancy only, 1.4% during pregnancy only, 1% postpartum only, and 2.5% in any combination of these times). The prevalence of any abuse was higher among low-income mothers (21.2%), lone mothers (35.3%), and Aboriginal mothers (30.6%). In 52% of the cases, abuse was perpetrated by an intimate partner. Receiving information on what to do was reported by 61% of the abused mothers. CONCLUSIONS: Large population-based studies on abuse around pregnancy can facilitate the identification of patterns of abuse and women at high risk for abuse. Before and after pregnancy may be particularly important times to monitor risk of abuse.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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