MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765548240 · doi:10.1177/1077801217731542

Using the Woman Abuse Screening Tool to Screen for and Assess Dating Violence in College Students

2017· article· en· W2765548240 on OpenAlexaff
Janet Yuen Ha Wong, Dyt Fong, Jessie Ho-Yin Yau, Edmond Pui Hang Choi, Anna Choi, Judith Belle Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueViolence Against Women · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnxietyMedicineDepression (economics)Clinical psychologyExploratory factor analysisPoison controlConfirmatory factor analysisPsychiatrySuicide preventionPsychometricsMedical emergencyStructural equation modeling

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study aimed to evaluate the measurement properties of the Woman Abuse Screening Tool (WAST) in Chinese college students. A cross-sectional survey was conducted in Hong Kong. A cutoff score of 10 was found to be able to discriminate between abused and nonabused Chinese young adults. The total score was significantly correlated with total scores for anxiety and depression on the Chinese version of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Two-factor structure of the WAST was supported by exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. The Chinese WAST was found to be valid in screening for and assessing intimate partner violence.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.315 · 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.

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

Citations15
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueViolence Against WomenSame topicIntimate Partner and Family ViolenceFrench-language works237,207