MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Professionals and interfamily violence against children and adolescents: in between legal and conceptual precepts

2016· article· en· W2559776935 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

VenueRevista da Escola de Enfermagem da USP · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDomestic violenceIntervention (counseling)CriminologyNursingPsychologySocial psychologyHuman factors and ergonomicsPoison controlMedicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To identify the conceptions of professionals regarding interfamily violence against children and adolescents. METHOD: A qualitative study conducted with 15 professionals who had taken children and adolescents under their care as a result of interfamily violence. Data were collected between November, 2013, and March, 2015, through semi-structured interviews. Data were organized and analyzed using the Textual Discourse Analysis technique. RESULTS: The professional discourse highlighted that some legal aspects regarding the handling of interfamily violence against children and adolescents are neglected; an omission supported by the justification of professionals to preserve the family. We highlight the confrontation between the concept of family as a caregiver and the family that commits violence against children, in addition to the positioning of professionals, which does not include the family or the aggressor in the intervention process in facing situations of interfamily violence attended to by the services. CONCLUSION: Acting against interfamily violence requires professionals to do away with some pre-established concepts in ordee to put the actual needs of victims and families into evidence. OBJETIVO: Identificar, com base no discurso dos profissionais, suas concepções a respeito da violência intrafamiliar contra crianças e adolescentes. MÉTODO: Estudo qualitativo, realizado com 15 profissionais, que tiveram sob seus cuidados crianças e adolescentes atendidas em decorrência da violência intrafamiliar. Os dados foram coletados entre novembro de 2013 e março de 2015, por meio de entrevistas semiestruturadas. Os dados foram organizados e analisados utilizando a técnica de Análise Textual Discursiva. RESULTADOS: O discurso dos profissionais colocou em evidência que alguns aspectos legais em relação ao manejo da violência intrafamiliar contra crianças e adolescentes são negligenciados, omissão respaldada pela justificativa dos profissionais de preservar a família. Destaca-se o confronto entre a concepção de família como cuidadora e a família que violenta os filhos, além do posicionamento dos profissionais, os quais não incluem a família e o agressor nos processos de intervenção frente às situações de violência intrafamiliar atendidas nos serviços. CONCLUSÃO: Atuar frente à violência intrafamiliar requer do profissional romper com algumas concepções preestabelecidas para colocar em evidência as reais necessidades de vítimas e famílias.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.724

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.313 · 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