MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2582111764 · doi:10.1177/0886260517689886

Ghanaian Women’s Knowledge and Perceptions of Services Available to Victims of Intimate Partner Violence

2017· article· en· W2582111764 on OpenAlexaff
Akua Anyemedu, Eric Y. Tenkorang, Patricia Dold

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Interpersonal Violence · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDomestic violenceService providerPsychological interventionQualitative researchService (business)Poison controlUnit (ring theory)Suicide preventionMedicinePerceptionOccupational safety and healthNursingService delivery frameworkPsychologyEnvironmental healthBusinessSociologyMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents qualitative findings on women's knowledge and perceptions of services available to victims of domestic violence in Ghana. In addition, the challenges to access of service and service delivery are explored. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 10 female residents of Sowutuom, a periurban community in Accra, Ghana. An additional three semistructured interviews were also conducted with local service providers in Accra. Results showed that awareness among respondents of available services was low. The majority of women had heard of the Domestic Violence and Victim Support Unit of the Ghana Police Service, though they had limited knowledge of the kind of support provided by this service provider. In addition, most women expressed doubt in the ability of these services to adequately handle cases of intimate partner violence. This study demonstrates that more educational campaigns need to be carried out to raise awareness among Ghanaians on domestic violence and the formal interventions available in the country.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.293
Threshold uncertainty score0.645

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.316 · 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.

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

Citations25
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Interpersonal ViolenceSame topicIntimate Partner and Family ViolenceFrench-language works237,207