Organization of professional practices against intrafamily violence against children and adolescents in the institutional context
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: to analyze based on the practitioners' discourse, the way they organize their practices confronting situations of intra-family violence against children and adolescents. Method: qualitative research carried out with 15 professionals who work in social and health services located in the southernmost of Brazil. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews, performed at the participants' workplace. We used a theoretical matrix to analyze the data, based on Institutional Ethnography and the technique of discursive textual analysis. Results: the practitioners' practices developed in situations of intra-family violence against children and adolescents are organized on the basis of: power relations that take place in services that respond to violence situations; routines instituted to meet the demands of care in services; and the interplay between the conception of violence as a public health problem and the conception of violence as a social problem. Conclusion: the way these practices are organized is reflected in actions that are not protective against situations of intra-family violence against children and adolescents.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".