Influence of intimate partner violence during pregnancy on fear of childbirth
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Women are at increased risk of intimate partner violence (IPV) during pregnancy. This may impact women's positive anticipation for birth. Negative feelings around birth often translate to a fear of childbirth. Our aim was to examine the prevalence IPV and whether physical, sexual, psychological IPV during pregnancy predicts fear of childbirth among Iranian pregnant women. METHOD: A population-based cross sectional study was conducted in North-East Iran. Pregnant women (n=174) at least 14weeks gestation attending health centers were selected for inclusion through a stratified sampling method. IPV, fear of birth, state and trait anxiety and socio-demographic variables were collected using validated instruments. To achieve the final models the Bayesian information criterion was used. A p value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Seventy-three percent of women reported experiencing IPV at least once within their current pregnancy. Fear of birth was prevalent (61.5%). Logistic regression analysis revealed that after adjusting for confounding factors, in nulliparous physical IPV significantly predicted fear of birth (adjusted OR=12.15; 95% CI, 1.33, 110.96) while, in multiparous psychological IPV associated inversely with fear of birth (adjusted OR=0.18; 95% CI, 0.04, 0.73). For all participants, physical IPV increased the chance of fear of birth, (adjusted OR=2.47; 95% CI, 1.01, 6.02). CONCLUSION: All pregnant women experiencing physical violence had a higher chance of fear of birth. Screening programs for fear of birth and IPV need to be implemented in particular for nulliparous women. Providing continuity of midwifery care and family therapy may be strategies for early support to reduce IPV to pregnant women.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it