MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2956276123 · doi:10.2105/ajph.2019.305179

A 15-Year Population-Based Investigation of Sexual Assault Cases Across the Province of Ontario, Canada, 2002–2016

2019· article· en· W2956276123 on OpenAlexaffabout
Katherine A. Muldoon, Glenys Smith, Robert Talarico, M. Heimerl, Cheynne McLean, Kari Sampsel, Douglas G. Manuel

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Public Health · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicElder Abuse and Neglect
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemographyMedicinePoisson regressionStandardized ratePopulationCensusInjury preventionPoison controlOccupational safety and healthEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives. To estimate the population-level frequencies and standardized rates of sexual assault cases in the province of Ontario, Canada. Methods. We conducted a 15-year retrospective analysis (2002–2016) of sexual assault cases by linking 5 provincial administrative health databases. We defined sexual assault by an algorithm of 23 International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, and physician billing codes. We calculated age- and sex-stratified standardized rates per 100 000 census population, and we used age- and sex-stratified Poisson regressions to determine annual rate ratios. Results. Between 2002 and 2016, there were 52 780 incident cases of sexual assault in Ontario at a rate of 27.38 per 100 000 population. The highest rates were found among females aged 15 to 19 years (187 per 100 000) and 20 to 24 years (127 per 100 000). Among males, the highest rates were observed among children aged 0 to 4 years (41 per 100 000) and 5 to 9 years (29 per 10 000). Among males and females, the annual rate ratio increased among those aged 15 years and older and decreased among those aged 14 years and younger. Conclusions. Sexual assault was documented across all age groups and sexes, from children to elders, with high standardized rates among adolescents and children.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.190

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations22
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Public HealthSame topicElder Abuse and NeglectFrench-language works237,207