MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2921010591 · doi:10.3390/challe10010021

Intimate Partner Violence: A Potential Challenge for Women’s Health in Angola

2019· article· en· W2921010591 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

VenueChallenges · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDomestic violenceSexual violenceMedicineHealth careLogistic regressionOccupational safety and healthCross-sectional studyPoison controlSuicide preventionConfidence intervalPublic healthEnvironmental healthDemographyPsychologyPsychiatryNursingPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intimate partner violence (IPV), as the most common form of violence against women, is recognised as a fundamental violation of women’s human rights and a significant public health concern worldwide. IPV is also a widespread phenomenon in Africa where the associated health challenges can be particularly serious due to fragile healthcare systems. To date, there is no systematic research on IPV and its association with healthcare use among adult women in Angola. Therefore, we conducted the present study on IPV among women of childbearing age (15–49 years) in Angola by analysing cross-sectional data from Angola Demographic and Health Survey (2015–2016). The objectives were to assess the predictors of IPV and its association with healthcare use. IPV was assessed by women’s experience of physical, emotional and sexual violence, and healthcare use was assessed by self-reported medical visits during last 12 months. Logistic regression methods were used to analyse the data. Our findings showed that more than two-fifths of the women reported experiencing any IPV (41.1%, 95%Confidence Interval (CI)= 38.7 to 43.6), with physical IPV (32.3%, 95%CI = 30.3 to 34.5) being the most prevalent followed by emotional (27.3%, 95%CI = 25.3 to 29.4), and sexual IPV (7.4%, 95%I = 6.6 to 8.4). In the multivariate analysis, women’s religious background, husband’s alcohol drinking, spousal age difference, and frequency of attending church appeared to be the most important predictors of IPV. Nonpregnant women who experienced emotional [OR = 1.476, 95%CI = 1.154,1.887] and sexual IPV [Odds Ratio (OR) = 1.393, 95%CI = 1.068,1.816] had increase odds of healthcare visits during last 12 months. In conclusion, our findings suggest a noticeably high prevalence of IPV among Angolan women. Those who experience emotional and sexual IPV might be at higher odds of suffering from medical conditions and should be given special attention in primary care settings.

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)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.534
Threshold uncertainty score0.769

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.308 · 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