MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2530979132 · doi:10.1037/ccp0000129

Strength at Home Couples program to prevent military partner violence: A randomized controlled trial.

2016· article· en· W2530979132 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersCenters for Disease Control and Prevention
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialDomestic violencePoison controlSuicide preventionPopulationRelative riskVeterans AffairsPsychologyInjury preventionDyadIntervention (counseling)MedicineClinical psychologyPhysical therapyConfidence intervalPsychiatryMedical emergencySocial psychologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the efficacy of Strength at Home Couples, a cognitive-behavioral trauma-informed intimate partner violence (IPV) preventive intervention for married or partnered military service members or veterans. No prior randomized controlled trial had supported the efficacy of such an intervention in this population. METHOD: Participants included 69 male service members or veterans and their female partners. Recruitment was conducted from February 2010 through August 2013, and participation occurred within 2 Department of Veterans Affairs hospitals. All couples completed an initial assessment including diagnostic interviews and measures of physical and psychological IPV and were randomized by cohort to a supportive prevention couples group or Strength at Home Couples. All couples were reassessed at postintervention and at 6 and 12 months follow-ups. RESULTS: Both service members or veterans and their female partners engaged in fewer acts of reported physical and psychological IPV in the Strength at Home Couples condition relative to supportive prevention, and relative risk of physical violence was lower for both members of the dyad in Strength at Home Couples at follow-up assessments (male service member or veteran IPV relative risk [RR] = .53; female IPV RR = .43). Those in Strength at Home Couples evidenced significantly greater program completion than did those in supportive prevention (RR = 1.73; 95% confidence interval [1.00, 2.99]). Exploratory analyses did not find differences between groups on relationship satisfaction. CONCLUSION: Results provide support for the efficacy of Strength at Home Couples in preventing physical IPV and reducing psychological IPV. These results have important implications for preventing violence and associated physical and mental health problems. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: Trial Registry Name: Strength at Home Couples Program; Registration Number: NCT00827879; URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00827879?term=strength+at+home&rank=1 (PsycINFO Database Record

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 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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.148
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.409 · 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