MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2475227721 · doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2016.06.005

Abuse of power in relationships and sexual health

2016· article· en· W2475227721 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Dionne Gesink, Lana Whiskeyjack, Terri Suntjens, Alanna Mihic, Priscilla McGilvery

Bibliographic record

VenueChild Abuse & Neglect · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsBlue Quills First Nations CollegeUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Snowball samplingGrounded theoryMental healthMedicinePsychologySocial psychologyPsychiatryQualitative researchSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STI rates are high for First Nations in Canada and the United States. Our objective was to understand the context, issues, and beliefs around high STI rates from a nêhiyaw (Cree) perspective. Twenty-two in-depth interviews were conducted with 25 community participants between March 1, 2011 and May 15, 2011. Interviews were conducted by community researchers and grounded in the Cree values of relationship, sharing, personal agency and relational accountability. A diverse purposive snowball sample of community members were asked why they thought STI rates were high for the community. The remainder of the interview was unstructured, and supported by the interviewer through probes and sharing in a conversational style. Modified grounded theory was used to analyze the narratives and develop a theory. The main finding from the interviews was that abuse of power in relationships causes physical, mental, emotional and spiritual wounds that disrupt the medicine wheel. Wounded individuals seek medicine to stop suffering and find healing. Many numb suffering by accessing temporary medicines (sex, drugs and alcohol) or permanent medicines (suicide). These medicines increase the risk of STIs. Some seek healing by participating in ceremony and restoring relationships with self, others, Spirit/religion, traditional knowledge and traditional teachings. These medicines decrease the risk of STIs. Younger female participants explained how casual relationships are safer than committed monogamous relationships. Resolving abuse of power in relationships should lead to improvements in STI rates and sexual health.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.892
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChild Abuse & NeglectSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207