MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169801542 · doi:10.1196/annals.1385.010

Violence against Pregnant Women in Northwestern Ontario

2006· article· en· W2169801542 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Josephine C. H. Tan, KATHRYN V. GREGOR

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsNorthern Teacher Education ProgramLakehead University
FundersLakehead UniversityNorthwestern University
KeywordsPregnancyMedicineConfoundingPoison controlCohort studyCohortInjury preventionDomestic violenceDemographySuicide preventionObstetricsPsychiatryPediatricsEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Violence against women during pregnancy is a global problem with adverse outcomes for the mothers and their children. This paper provides a discussion of the prevalence rates of pregnancy-related violence, associated factors, and outcomes. Most of the outcome literature focuses on perinatal and postnatal outcomes, but little is known about the longer term psychological outcome of children born to women abused during pregnancy. Moreover, the question as to whether the abuse increases during pregnancy remains unanswered given the equivocal findings in the literature. Findings from a small study conducted with women in the region of northwestern Ontario, Canada, are presented. The pattern of abuse during pregnancy over the three trimesters was examined. The long-term psychological outcomes of the children born to women abused during pregnancy were also investigated by comparing these children to a sex- and age-matched cohort of children born to women who were not abused during pregnancy. Although key confounding variables were controlled in the study, the results still showed that children born to women abused during pregnancy had greater behavioral problems.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations10
Published2006
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the New York Academy of SciencesSame topicIntimate Partner and Family ViolenceFrench-language works237,207